Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

DOI 10.1007/s11069-011-9969-3
ORIGINAL PAPER

Modeling and assessment of bridge structure for seismic

hazard prevention
Jeng-Wen Lin Cheng-Wu Chen Shang-Heng Chung

Received: 18 July 2011 / Accepted: 25 August 2011 / Published online: 16 September 2011
Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Abstract This study uses data from Mao-Luo-Hsi Bridge to model the bridge structure
and a set of developed alarm and action values to formulate guidelines for bridge maintenance and seismic hazard prevention. The bridge model is improved by incorporating onsite ambient vibration measurement to perform modal analyses. Dynamic analyses of the
bridge are implemented using the established 3D model subjected to uniform loading and
seismic force, with or without consideration of soil interaction with the structure. The
maximum displacements for different sections of the bridge are compared, and statistical
regression analyses are used to explore their correlation. Information for bridge safety
assessment is proposed, which can mitigate loss of property and lives due to bridge failure.
Regression analyses of the maximum displacements between abutments D and E of the
considered bridge in the axial, horizontal, and vertical directions under various seismic
intensities are conducted, giving R2 values of 0.9462, 0.9352, and 0.9010, respectively. The
developed maintenance guidelines are reliable since all parameters from regression analyses have a 95% confidence interval excluding the zero value. The bridge alarm value and
action value are determined for this bridge site at earthquake intensity scales of 4 and 5,
respectively.
Keywords Assessment
Bridge maintenance
Seismic hazard
Statistical regression

Structural modeling

J.-W. Lin
S.-H. Chung

Department of Civil Engineering, Feng Chia University, Taichung, Taiwan 407, ROC
C.-W. Chen (&)
Institute of Maritime Information and Technology, National Kaohsiung Marine University, Kaohsiung,
Taiwan, ROC
e-mail: chengwu@mail.nkmu.edu.tw
C.-W. Chen
Global Earth Observation and Data Analysis Center, National Cheng Kung University,
Tainan, Taiwan 701, ROC

123

1116

Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

1 Introduction
Advancements in geophysics and infrastructure simulations were discussed for earthquake
hazard to future ground motions and for earthquake risk of infrastructure damage (McCallen
and Larsen 2009). Modern earthquake hazard mapping and assessment in California, for
instance, were reviewed using a deterministic or scenario approach (Mualchin 2011). In
particular, bridge functionality was critical to the earthquake risk assessment of transportation networks (Padgett and DesRoches 2007; Stergiou and Kiremidjian 2010). Taiwan
being located near the junction of two seismic plates makes earthquake a frequent
occurrence, leading to bridge safety an important issue. Hence, this study extends these
viewpoints and simulates structural behaviors of bridges for the development of seismic
hazard prevention models.
Modern earthquake hazard mapping and assessment in California, for instance, were
reviewed using a deterministic or scenario approach (Mualchin 2011), whose earthquake
hazard assessment followed a deterministic seismic hazard analysis that assessed the
seismic hazard in the event of the maximum credible earthquake magnitude from each of
the known seismogenic faults within and near the state, and whose approach was practically used in seismic hazard assessment for building and bridge engineering, particularly in
California. The level of earthquakes and aging of infrastructure strongly correlated with the
degree of infrastructure damage. In Taiwan, mild earthquakes such as one to three
earthquake intensity scales might not cause damage to infrastructure but shaking feelings
to people; medium earthquakes such as four to five earthquake intensity scales might cause
damage to infrastructure, such as cracks, while strong earthquakes such as those above six
scales will probably cause structural damage and even structural collapse (Central Weather
Bureau, Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Taiwan, R.O.C. 2000).
Bridge functionality was critical to the earthquake risk assessment of transportation
networks. In the work of Padgett and DesRoches (2007), relationships between bridge
damage and the resulting loss of functionality of the bridge were critical to assessing the
impact of an earthquake event on the performance of the transportation network and thus
offered a link between various types of bridge component damage and the expected level
of allowable traffic carrying capacity due to closure decisions and repair procedures.
Another seismic risk assessment model for transportation network systems that included
the hazard exposure from ground shaking, liquefaction, and landslides was presented by
Stergiou and Kiremidjian (2010), who generated an annual risk curve based on the rate of
occurrence of possible events and their corresponding loss found to be higher at commuter
traffic delay than that from bridge damage.
Taiwan is located near the junction of two seismic plates making earthquake a frequent
occurrence. This leads to bridge safety an issue which should not be ignored. A structure
could be damaged by earthquake events in areas where it was difficult to see with the eyes
alone, meaning that the effectiveness of visual checks was limited (Lin and Chen 2009).
On-site tests were adopted for bridge structure safety analyses. The methods used included
the emerging sensor-based structural health monitoring technology that had a potential for
cost-effective maintenance of aging civil infrastructure systems (Feng 2009), which integrated continuous and global monitoring using on-structure sensors with targeted local
nondestructive evaluation (NDE) whose hardware included a novel fiber optic accelerometer, a vision-based displacement sensor, a distributed strain sensor, and a microwave
imaging device. Such NDE was also proposed by developing a portable nondestructive
testing robotic arm that could be carried by climbing and walking robots in order to
evaluate defects in geometrically complex industrial infrastructure such as petrochemical

123

Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

1117

storage tanks, bridges, pressure vessels, and products such as turbine blades (Sattar and
Brenner 2009). However, when an earthquake occurs, there are no immediate control
measures such as disaster warnings or limited vehicles passing on bridges.
The current conditions of the bridge can be determined through on-site testing. Due to
problems with construction quality, deterioration due to long-time use and problems such
as material aging can mean that structures suffer from problems of material fatigue and
shrinkage. Moreover, bridges are vulnerable to erosion by river currents and vehicle traffic,
which can exceed predicted values and lead to overloading. As a consequence, the actual
conditions may be different from the results of theoretical analysis. What may happen to
bridge structures during an earthquake may be estimated more precisely if the differences
between reality and theory can be considered (Lin 2008). The current conditions for a
bridge can be simulated based on on-site test results, after which the structural analysis
program (SAP2000) can be used to simulate the vibration behaviors of bridge structures
subjected to different earthquake intensity scales before a disaster actually happens.
Based on these arguments, we first establish and then improve the bridge structure
model by incorporating on-site ambient vibration measurement to perform modal analyses
that reflect the current conditions of the bridge. Dynamic analyses of the considered bridge
are then performed using the established 3D model subjected to uniform loading and
seismic force, with or without consideration of soil interaction with the structure. In
particular, simulations of the real structural behaviors of the bridge are feasible for different earthquake intensity scales to obtain their corresponding largest bridge surface
displacements. Multiple regression analyses are adopted to create a set of alarm value
action value safety evaluation standards for bridge maintenance and seismic hazard
prevention.

2 SAP2000 bridge structure model

For the areas with low frequencies, according to the ambient vibration measurement, the
structural parameters are set based on construction graphs. Take Bridge E (ES3) for
example. In order to improve the bridge model, every node on the bridge surface is set up
based on the coordinates from the construction graph to ensure that the direction of the
bridge is the same as the actual direction.
Figure 1 shows a planar graph of the steel structure of the bridge. The AUTOCAD
software is used to confirm the coordinates of the nodes that are then converted into real

Fig. 1 Planar graph of the steel structure of the bridge

123

1118

Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

coordinates. The SAP2000 model grid lines corresponding to the real X and Y axes are
determined, as shown in Fig. 2.
By connecting these nodes, the XY-plane graph for the SAP2000 model is set up
according to real coordinates, as shown in Fig. 3.
The values of the parameters are input according to the construction graph. The XYplane graph, which simulates Bridge E using SAP2000, is shown in Fig. 4.

Fig. 2 Planar grid graph for the SAP2000 model

Fig. 3 XY-plane graph for the SAP2000 model set up according to real coordinates

Fig. 4 XY-plane graph for the SAP2000 model after the parameter values are input

123

Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

1119

The conditions with and without soil interaction are both considered. The SAP2000
structure analysis software was used to model the bridge structure. According to drilling
test reports by the Chung-Nan D Drilling Engineering Ltd. published in September, 1993,
the box caisson foundation was designed using the equivalent soil interaction simulated
with a spring. The pier is shown in Fig. 5.

3 Modal analyses and maintenance principles

Earthquake data for the 921 Earthquake occurred in Central Taiwan on September 21, 1999
from the TCU075 station located in Nantou County Caotun Elementary School, which is
the closest one to the Mao-Luo-Hsi Bridge, were used for the structure model simulated
using the software SAP2000 for dynamic simulation analyses.
After analyzing the conditions with and without soil interaction, according to the
accumulated energy under different modalities in three directions, UX, UY, and UZ, the
Fig. 5 Set up of the equivalent
spring for the pier of Bridge E
(EP2)

123

1120

Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

Fig. 6 3D SAP2000 bridge model with uniform loading and seismic force (Bridge D, without consideration
of soil interaction)

Fig. 7 3D SAP2000 bridge model with uniform loading and seismic force (Bridge E, without consideration
of soil interaction)

123

Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

1121

Fig. 8 3D SAP2000 bridge model with uniform loading and seismic force (Bridge D, with consideration of
soil interaction)

principal natural frequency of the structure was determined. However, the principal natural
frequency of the structure may occur under a later modality. The modal analysis results
from SAP2000 indicate that the natural frequency increases as the modal number increases.
In other words, a larger modal number leads to a higher natural frequency. Although we
cannot guarantee that the above-mentioned natural frequency is the principal structural
frequency, it is assured that the actual principal structural frequency will not be any higher.
The largest bridge surface displacements that could occur during earthquakes of different scales were simulated. The 921 Earthquake data from station TCU075 located at the
Caotun Elementary School, which is the closest one to Mao-Luo-Hsi Bridge, were used.
After carrying out the simulation analyses with SAP2000, the largest displacements along
the axial, horizontal, and vertical directions were obtained. By observing whether there was
severe vibration or displacement, the action value criterion can be determined. The next
scale is the alarm value.

4 Dynamic analyses
Dynamic analyses of the considered bridge are performed using the established 3D
SAP2000 bridge model subjected to uniform loading and seismic force, with or without
consideration of soil interaction with the structure. Imposing a uniform load of 40.2 kg/m
and the specified seismic force, but without consideration of soil interaction, the bridge
surface displacement models for Bridge D and Bridge E are shown in Figs. 6 and 7,

123

1122

Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

Fig. 9 3D SAP2000 bridge model with uniform loading and seismic force (Bridge E, with consideration of
soil interaction)

respectively. The models with the consideration of soil interaction for Bridge D and Bridge
E are shown in Figs. 8 and 9, respectively.

5 Case studysafety assessment of bridge structure

The safety assessment and functionality of the bridge were critical to assessing the impact
of an earthquake event (Padgett and DesRoches 2007). After the above dynamic analyses,
the safety assessment of the bridge can be implemented using the maximum displacements
of the bridge model under various earthquake intensity scales. If the maximum displacements curve suddenly increases, its corresponding earthquake intensity scale refers to the
value for the bridge potential damage and for closure decisions and repair procedures of the
bridge (Lin 2008).
Earthquakes with maximum accelerations of 0.0008, 0.0025, 0.0082, 0.0255, 0.0816,
0.2549, and 0.4079 g would lead to maximum displacements being imposed on abutment
D (bridge deck DS2; bridge piers DP1 and DP2) and abutment E (bridge deck EP3; bridge
piers EP2 and EP3) of the Mao-Luo-Hsi Bridge. The data used for the simulations were
earthquake data for the 921 Earthquake obtained from the TCU075 station located in
Caotun Elementary School. The SAP2000 bridge structure model was used to simulate the

123

Maximum displacement along the

vertical direction (cm)

Maximum displacement along the

horizontal direction (cm)

Maximum displacement along the

axial direction (cm)

Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

1123

Intensity scale

Intensity scale

Intensity scale

Fig. 10 Maximum displacements along the axial, horizontal, and vertical directions (Bridge D)

maximum displacements along the axial, horizontal, and vertical directions under different
intensities, as shown in Figs. 10 and 11.
Regression analyses were carried out using the Stata software to find the relationships
among the largest displacements along the axial, horizontal, and vertical directions for
Bridge D and Bridge E. The results are shown in Figs. 12, 13, and 14. Table 1 summarizes
the largest displacement results along the axial, horizontal, and vertical directions under
different earthquake intensities for Bridge D and Bridge E. The R2 values are 0.9462,
0.9352, and 0.9010, respectively, indicating that the two bridge sections are highly correlated. In addition, the zero value does not fall in any of the 95% confidence intervals
(De Veaux et al. 2009) for all estimated parameters from regression analyses, implying that
these verification results cannot be further refined and thus can be trusted (Lin and Chen
2009).

123

Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

Maximum displacement along the

axial direction (cm)

1124

Maximum displacement along the

horizontal direction (cm)

Intensity scale

vertical direction (cm)

Maximum displacement along the

Intensity scale

Intensity scale
Fig. 11 Maximum displacements along the axial, horizontal, and vertical directions (Bridge E)

6 Conclusions
A bridge structure model is established and improved by incorporating on-site ambient
vibration measurement to simulate the real structural behaviors of the bridge subjected to
various earthquake intensity scales for dynamic analyses in this study. The maximum
displacements for different sections of the bridge are compared, and multiple regression
analyses are adopted to create a set of alarm valueaction value safety evaluation
standards for bridge maintenance and seismic hazard prevention. In the first regression
analysis, the intersection of the regression lines and the largest displacements for Bridge D
and Bridge E occurs when the earthquake intensity scale is between 2 and 6. With more

123

1125

Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

U1

-1

Fitted values

.2

.4

.6

.8

U1

Fig. 12 Regression analysis for the largest displacements along the axial direction for Bridge D and Bridge E

U2

-1

Fitted values

.2

.4

.6

.8

U2
Fig. 13 Regression analysis for the largest displacements along the horizontal direction for Bridge D and
Bridge E

Table 1 R2 values along each direction for Bridge D and Bridge E

Direction

Axial

Horizontal

Vertical

R2 value

0.9462

0.9352

0.9010

terms, we can more precisely estimate that the intersection occurs when the earthquake
intensity scale is near 4. When the earthquake intensity scale reaches 5, there is a significant increase in the displacement. Therefore, earthquake intensity scale 4 is chosen as
the alarm value. The next earthquake intensity scale 5 is the action value. The action value
is not larger than the maximum action value with consideration of soil liquefaction. This
means that when there is an earthquake of intensity scale 4 where the bridge is located,

123

Nat Hazards (2012) 61:11151126

20

1126

U3

10

15

Fitted values

10

15

U3
Fig. 14 Regression analysis for the largest displacements along the vertical direction for Bridge D and
Bridge E

authorities should be ready to close the bridge and call a meeting with related units to come
up with strategies for bridge maintenance and seismic hazard prevention. If the earthquake
intensity scale reaches 5, the action value, the bridge should be closed immediately to stop
anyone from crossing it and the overall safety of the bridge should be re-evaluated.
Acknowledgments The work described in this paper consists part of research projects sponsored by the
National Science Council, Taiwan, R.O.C. (Contract Nos. NSC 95-2221-E-035-111, NSC 100-2221-E-022013-MY2, NSC 100-2628-E-022-002-MY2, and NSC 98-2221-E-366-006-MY2), and the Second Maintenance Office, Directorate General of Highways, MOTC, Taiwan, R.O.C. (Contract No. 97-24010), and by
Feng Chia University (Contract No. 99-10G27213) whose support was greatly appreciated.

References
ChungNan D Drilling Engineering Ltd. (1993) Drilling test report, Taiwan
Central Weather Bureau, Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Taiwan, R.O.C. (2000) Earthquake intensity table. http://www.cwb.gov.tw/V7/knowledge/encyclopedia/eq035.htm
De Veaux RD, Velleman PF, Bock DE (2009) Intro stats, 3rd edn. Pearson Education, Boston
Feng MQ (2009) Application of structural health monitoring in civil infrastructure. Smart Struct Syst
5(4):469482
Lin JW (2008) Taiwan provincial highway no.3 208K?484 Mao-Luo-Hsi Bridge structure safety evaluation
report. Second Maintenance Office, Directorate General of Highways, Ministry of Transportation and
Communications, Taiwan, R.O.C
Lin JW, Chen HJ (2009) Repetitive identification of structural systems using a nonlinear model parameter
refinement approach. Shock Vibr 16(3):229240
McCallen DB, Larsen SC (2009) High performance simulations for transformational earthquake risk
assessments. J Phys Conf Ser 180(1), SciDAC conference-scientific discovery through advanced
computing, June 2009
Mualchin L (2011) History of modern earthquake hazard mapping and assessment in California using a
deterministic or scenario approach. Pure Appl Geophys 168(34):383407
Padgett JE, DesRoches R (2007) Bridge functionality relationships for improved seismic risk assessment of
transportation networks. Earthq Spectra 23(1):115130
Sattar TP, Brenner AA (2009) Robotic system for inspection of test objects with unknown geometry using
NDT methods. Ind Robot Int J 36(4):340343
Stergiou EC, Kiremidjian AS (2010) Risk assessment of transportation systems with network functionality
losses. Struct Infrastruct Eng 6(12):111125

123