6.4.
2(A) DIVISION IA—SEISMIC DESIGN
faction failures of the above type have led to bridge fail-
ures during past earthquakes.
6.4.2(B) Foundation Design
For the load combinations specified in Article 6.2.2,
the soil strength capable of being mobilized by the foun-
dations shall be established in the site investigation report.
Because of the dynamic cyclic nature of seismic loading,
the ultimate capacity of the foundation supporting
medium should be used in conjunction with these load
combinations. Due consideration shall be given to the
magnitude of the seismically induced foundation settle-
ment that the bridge can withstand.
Transient foundation uplift or rocking involving sepa-
ration from the subsoil of up to one-half of an end bearing
foundation pile group or up to one-half of the contact area
of foundation footings is permitted under seismic loading,
provided that foundation soils are not susceptible to loss
of strength under the imposed cyclic loading.
General comments on soil strength and stiffness mobi-
lized during earthquakes, foundation uplift, lateral load-
ing of piles, soil-structure interaction and foundation de-
sign in environments susceptible to liquefaction are
provided in the Commentary.
6.4.2(C) Special Pile Requirements
The following special pile requirements are in addition
to the requirements for piles in other applicable specifica-
tions.
Piles may be used to resist both axial and lateral loads.
The minimum depth of embedment, together with the
axial and lateral pile capacities, required to resist seismic
loads shall be determined by means of the design criteria
established in the site investigation report. Note that the
ultimate capacity of the piles should be used in designing
for seismic loads.
All piles shall be adequately anchored to the pile foot-
ing or cap. Concrete piles shall be anchored by embed-
ment of sufficient length of pile reinforcement (unless
special anchorage is provided) to develop uplift forces but
in no case shall this length be less than the development
length required for the reinforcement. Each concrete-
filled pipe pile shall be anchored by at least four reinforc-
ing steel dowels with a minimum steel ratio of 0.01 em-
bedded sufficiently as required for concrete piles. Timber
and steel piles, including unfilled pipe piles, shall be pro-
vided with anchoring devices to develop all uplift forces
adequately but in no case shall these forces be less than
10% of the allowable pile load.
All concrete piles shall be reinforced to resist the de-
sign moments, shears, and axial loads. Minimum rein-
forcement shall be not less than the following:
© 2002 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.
461
1. Cast-in-Place Concrete Piles. Longitudinal rein-
forcing steel shall be provided for cast-in-place concrete
piles in the upper one-third (8 feet or 2.4 meters
minimum) of the pile length with a minimum steel ratio
of 0.005 provided by at least four bars. Spiral reinforce-
ment or equivalent ties of 1⁄4 inches (6 millimeters)
diameter or larger shall be provided at 9 inches (225 mil-
limeters) maximum pitch, except for the top 2 feet (610
millimeters) below the pile cap reinforcement where the
pitch shall be 3 inches (75 millimeters) maximum.
2. Precast Piles. Longitudinal reinforcing steel shall
be provided for each precast concrete pile with a min-
imum steel ratio of 0.01 provided by at least four bars.
Spiral reinforcement or equivalent ties of No. 3 bars or
larger shall be provided at 9 inches (225 millimeters)
maximum pitch, except for the top 2 feet (610 mil-
limeters) below the pile cap reinforcement where the
pitch shall be 3 inches (75 millimeters) maximum.
3. Precast-Prestressed Piles. Ties in precast-pre-
stressed piles shall conform to the requirements of pre-
cast piles.
6.4.3 Abutments
6.4.3(A) Free-Standing Abutments
For free-standing abutments or retaining walls which
may displace horizontally without significant restraint
(e.g., superstructure supported by sliding bearings), the
pseudostatic Mononobe-Okabe method of analysis is
recommended for computing lateral active soil pressures
during seismic loading. A seismic coefficient equal to
one-half the acceleration coefficient (kh ⫽ 0.5A) is
recommended. The effects of vertical acceleration may be
omitted. Abutments should be proportioned to slide rather
than tilt, and provisions should be made to accommodate
small horizontal seismically induced abutment displace-
ments when minimal damage is desired at abutment sup-
ports. Abutment displacements of up to o 10A inches (250A
millimeters) may be expected.
The seismic design of free-standing abutments should
take into account forces arising from seismically induced
lateral earth pressures, additional forces arising from wall
inertia effects and the transfer of seismic forces from the
bridge deck through bearing supports which do not slide
freely (e.g., elastomeric bearings).
For free-standing abutments which are restrained
from horizontal displacement by anchors or batter piles,
the magnitudes of seismically induced lateral earth pres-
sures are higher than those given by the Mononobe-
Okabe method of analysis. As a first approximation,
it is recommended that the maximum lateral earth pressure
be computed by using a seismic coefficient kh ⫽ 1.5A in
conjunction with the Mononobe-Okabe analysis method.