DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Study on the Improvement of Response Spectrum Analysis of Pile-supported Wharf with Virtual Fixed Point

가상고정점기법이 적용된 잔교식 구조물의 응답스펙트 럼해석법 개선사항 도출 연구

  • Yun, Jung Won (Smart City & Construction Engineering, Korea University of Science & Technology) ;
  • Han, Jin Tae (Korea Institute of Civil Engineering & Building Technology)
  • 윤정원 (과학기술연합대학원대학교(UST) 스마트시티&건설공학) ;
  • 한진태 (한국건설기술연구원)
  • Received : 2018.04.26
  • Accepted : 2018.07.05
  • Published : 2018.09.01

Abstract

As a method of seismic-design for pile-supported wharves, equivalent static analysis, response spectrum analysis, and time history analysis method are applied. Among them, the response spectrum analysis is widely used to obtain the maximum response of a structure. Because the ground is not modeled in the response spectrum analysis of pile-supported wharves, the amplified input ground acceleration should be calculated by ground classification or seismic response analysis. However, it is difficult to calculate the input ground acceleration through ground classification because the pile-supported wharf is build on inclined ground, the methods to calculate the input ground acceleration proposed in the standards are different. Therefore, in this study, the dynamic centrifuge model tests and the response spectrum analysis were carried out to calculate the appropriate input ground acceleration. The pile moment in response spectrum analysis and the dynamic centrifuge model tests were compared. As a result of comparison, it was shown that the response spectrum analysis results using the amplified acceleration in the ground surface were appropriate.

Acknowledgement

Grant : 항만 및 어항 설계기준 고도화를 위한 성능기반 내진설계 기술 개발

Supported by : 해양수산부

References

  1. International Navigation Association. Seismic design guidelines for port structures. c2001.
  2. Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries. Seismic design standards of harbor and port. Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea. c1999.
  3. Lombardi D, Bhattacharya S. Evaluation of seismic performance of pile‐supported models in liquefiable soils. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics. 2016 May 1;45(6):1019-1038. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2716
  4. Banayan-Kermani A, Bargi K, Heidary-Torkamani H. Seismic performance assessment of pile-supported wharves retrofitted by carbon fibre-reinforced polymer composite considering ageing effect. Advances in Structural Engineering. 2016 Apr;19(4):581-598. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369433216630187
  5. Doran B, Shen J, Akbas B. Seismic evaluation of existing wharf structures subjected to earthquake excitation: case study. Earthquake Spectra. 2015 May;31(2):1177-1194. https://doi.org/10.1193/021713EQS035M
  6. Chiaramonte MM, Arduino P, Lehman DE, Roeder CW. Seismic analyses of conventional and improved marginal wharves. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics. 2013 Aug 1;42(10):1435-1450. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2280
  7. Jiren L, Bo S, Jianyu C. Seismic dynamic damage characteristics of vertical and batter pile-supported wharf structure systems. Journal of Engineering Science & Technology Review. 2015 Nov 1;8(5):180-189.
  8. Heidary-Torkamani H, Bargi K, Amirabadi R. Seismic vulnerability assessment of pile-supported wharves using fragility curves. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering. 2014 Nov;10(11):1417-1431. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2013.823453
  9. Heidary-Torkamani H, Bargi K, Amirabadi R, McCllough NJ. Fragility estimation and sensitivity analysis of an idealized pilesupported wharf with batter piles. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 2014 Jun 1;61:92-106.
  10. Amirabadi R, Bargi K, Dolatshahi Piroz M, Heidary Torkamani H, Mccullough N. Determination of optimal probabilistic seismic demand models for pile-supported wharves. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering. 2014 Sep 2;10(9):1119-1145. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2013.793723
  11. Heidary Torkamani H, Bargi K, Amirabadi R. Fragility curves derivation for a pile-supported wharf. International Journal of Maritime Technology. 2013 Jun 15;1:1-10.
  12. Calabrese A, Lai CG. Fragility functions of blockwork wharves using artificial neural networks. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 2013 Sep 1;52:88-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2013.05.002
  13. Su L, Lu J, Elgamal A, Arulmoli AK. Seismic performance of a pile-supported wharf: Three-dimensional finite element simulation. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 2017 Apr 30;95:167-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.01.009
  14. Shafieezadeh A, DesRoches R, Rix GJ, Werner SD. Three-dimensional wharf response to far-field and impulsive near-field ground motions in liquefiable soils. Journal of Structural Engineering. 2012 Aug 10;139(8):1395-1407.
  15. Comite Europeen de Normalisation. Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance. Part 2: Bridge, Brussels, Belgium. Geotechnical Aspects. CEN, Brussels. c2004.
  16. Kiureghian AD. A response spectrum method for random vibration analysis of MDF systems. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics. 1981 Jan 1;9(5):419-435. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290090503
  17. Muscolino G, Palmeri A. An earthquake response spectrum method for linear light secondary substructures. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology. 2007 Mar;44(1):193-211.
  18. Overseas Coastal Area Development Institute of Japan, Ports and Harbours Bureau, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management, Port and Airport Research Institute. Technical standards and commentaries for port and harbour facilities in Japan. Overseas Coastal Area Development Institute of Japan. c2009.
  19. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs. Seismic performance evaluation & improvement revision of existing structures (Harbors). Korea Infrastructures Safety and Technology Corporation. c2012.
  20. Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries. Ports and fishing harbours design code. Korea Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries. c2014.
  21. Kim JY, Jeong SS. Application of Virtual Fixed Point Theory and Discrete Analysis for Pile Bent Structures. Journal of the Korean Geotechnical Society. 2013 Jul 29(7):57-74. https://doi.org/10.7843/kgs.2013.29.7.57
  22. Kim DS, Kim NR, Choo YW, Cho GC. A newly developed stateof-the-art geotechnical centrifuge in Korea. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering. 2013 Jan 1;17(1):77-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-013-1350-5
  23. Lee SH, Choo Y W, Kim D S. Performance of an equivalent shear beam (ESB) model container for dynamic geotechnical centrifuge tests. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 2013;44:102-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.09.008
  24. McCullough NJ. The seismic geotechnical modeling, performance, and analysis of pile-supported wharves. c2003. (Doctoral dissertation).
  25. Wilson EL, Der Kiureghian A, Bayo EP. A replacement for the SRSS method in seismic analysis. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics. 1981 Jan 1;9(2):187-192. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290090207
  26. Meyerhof GG. Penetration tests and bearing capacity of cohesionless soils. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. 1956 Jan;82(1):1-9.
  27. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Seismic design criteria research II. Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea. c1997.
  28. Ministry of th e Interior and Safety. Announcement of common application of seismic design criteria. c2017.
  29. Kim JH. Model testing of bucket foundation for offshore structure in the centrifuge and development of miniature cone. c2016. (Doctoral dissertation).