9/11/2008

Bridge Modeling in OpenSees

Shaking Table Tests at Univ. of Nevada, Reno

Matthew Dryden
Prof. Greg Fenves
University of California, Berkeley

OpenSees Days 2008

OpenSees Days 2008

Motivation

• Soil-foundation-structure interaction
(SFSI) is difficult to test at the system
level.

• Test various components of the bridge

using available experimental facilities.

• Integrate the results from the tests into

a simulation model used to study Failure of the Hanshin Expressway

system effects. 1995 Kobe Earthquake

(http://nisee.berkeley.edu)

OpenSees Days 2008

1
 9/11/2008

Focus of this Research

• Simulate the response of the 2-span and
4-span reinforced concrete bridges tested
at UNR.

• Assess the validity of simulation models

using the measured response at both the
global and local levels.

6
Test 18 - Bent 3 Exp BWH
3 Table 3 PGA = 1.6 g
Drift Ratio (%)

-3

-6
10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (Sec)

OpenSees Days 2008

Design of 2-Span Bridge

• Built at 1/4-scale based on a prototype bridge with 4 ft
diameter columns, and 120 ft spans.

• Columns designed in accordance with NCHRP 12-

49/Caltrans SDC provisions.
ρlong = 1.6 %
ρlat = 0.9 %
• Column Heights
• Bent 1 – 6 ft Axial Load
• Bent 2 – 8 ft Ratio = 0.08

• Bent 3 – 5 ft

OpenSees Days 2008

2
 9/11/2008

Test Protocol

• 1994 Northridge Century

City North ground motion.
Peak Table Acceleration (g)
Test Table 1 Table 2 Table 3
• Series of 23 ground
motions successively 15 0.67 0.65 0.72
applied in the transverse 16 0.98 0.94 1.25
direction, 14 of which
were low-level motions 17 1.20 1.50 1.09
prior to yielding of the 18 1.56 1.81 1.59*
structure.
*Drift ratio exceeded 5.5% at bent 3.

OpenSees Days 2008

Simulations of 2-Span Bridge

elasticBeamColumn element
deck depth = 14 in.
deck width = 90 in.

elasticBeamColumn
rigid joint offset

Multiple support excitation command

Recorded table displacements

Rayleigh damping (2%) with the last

committed stiffness

OpenSees Days 2008

3
 9/11/2008

Column Modeling
Lp/Dcol
Bent 1 Bent 2 Bent 3
Priestley 0.52 0.60 0.48
nonlinear Berry 0.37 0.42 0.34
elastic
EIeff/EIg
Bent 1 Bent 2 Bent 3
Lp
M-κ 0.37 0.37 0.37
BeamWithHinges
Berry 0.32 0.37 0.29

0 100
Confined
Unconfined
80
-2
Stress (ksi)

Stress (ksi)
60
-4
40
Simulation
-6 Coupon 1
20
Coupon 2
Coupon 3
-8 0
-0.03 -0.025 -0.02 -0.015 -0.01 -0.005 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Strain (in./in.) Strain (in./in.)

Concrete02 Hysteretic

OpenSees Days 2008

Modifying the Script to Obtain

Convergence
while {$tCurrent < $tFinal && $ok == 0} {

test $testtype $tol $maxNumIter 0;

set ok [analyze 1 $DtAnalysis] Reducing
if {$ok != 0} {
the analysis
set ok [analyze 1 [expr $DtAnalysis/20.0]];

}
time step
if {$ok != 0} {

set ok [analyze 1 [expr $DtAnalysis/50.0]];

if {$ok != 0} {

set ok [analyze 1 [expr $DtAnalysis/100.0]];

OpenSees Days 2008

4
 9/11/2008

Modifying the Script to Obtain

Convergence
if {$ok != 0} {
test $testtype $tol 1000 0;
algorithm Newton -initial
set ok [analyze 1 [expr $DtAnalysis/20.0]]
test $testtype $tol $maxNumIter 2;
Changing
} the solution
if {$ok != 0} {
puts "Trying Broyden .."
algorithm Broyden 8
algorithm
set ok [analyze 1 [expr $DtAnalysis/20.0]]
}

if {$ok != 0} {
puts "Trying NewtonWithLineSearch .."
algorithm NewtonLineSearch .8
set ok [analyze 1 [expr $DtAnalysis/20.0]]
algorithm Newton
}

OpenSees Days 2008

Validation of Simulations
6
Test 18 - Bent 3 Exp Lp Priestley
3 Table 3 PGA = 1.6 g
Drift Ratio (%)

-3

-6
10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (Sec)

20 Bottom of West Column

10
φ/φ y

-10

-20
10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (Sec)

OpenSees Days 2008

5
 9/11/2008

Validation of Simulations
6
Exp
Peak Drift Ratio (%)

Bent 3
Lp Priestley
Lp Berry
3

0
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Test

30
Bottom of West Column

20
φ/φ y

10

0
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Test

OpenSees Days 2008

Design of 4-Span Bridge

• Same column reinforcement as in the 2-span bridge.

• Table excitation applied in both

horizontal directions.

• Actuators impose displacements in

the longitudinal direction at the
abutments.

• Column Heights
• Bent 1 – 5 ft
• Bent 2 – 7 ft
• Bent 3 – 6 ft
OpenSees Days 2008

6
 9/11/2008

Test Protocol
Max Table Acceleration (g)
Transverse Longitudinal
Test Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3
1B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.14 0.13
1C 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.10 0.13 0.12
1D 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.14 0.15
2 0.18 0.20 0.18 0.26 0.38 0.36
3 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.41 0.70 0.48
4A 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.88 1.22 1.25
4B 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.81 0.91 0.91
4C 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.78 0.92 0.78
4D 0.66 0.66 0.65 0.69 0.89 0.85
5 0.98 1.01 1.01 0.90 1.08 1.09
6 1.34 1.32 1.43 1.28 1.54 1.43
7 1.20 1.18 1.26 1.23 1.26 1.27
*Bridge restrainers present during Tests 1B, 4A, and 4B.

OpenSees Days 2008

Simulations of 4-Span Bridge

Bent 1

Bent 2
Force (kips)

Bent 3

OpenSees Days 2008

7
 9/11/2008

Extending the Existing Code

uniaxialMaterial ImpactMaterial $matTag $K1 $K2 $Delta_y $gap

4
x 10

2
Pounding Force (kips)

∆E =
(
k hδ mn+1 1 − e 2 ) K 1 = K eff +
∆E
n +1 aδ m2
-1

∆E
K eff = k h δ m K 2 = K eff −
-2 (1 − a )δ m2

-2 -1 0 1 2 δ y = aδ m
Displacement (in.)
(Muthukumar and DesRoches, 2006)

OpenSees Days 2008

Simulations of 4-Span Bridge

rigid offset
M- model

inverted-T cap beam

rigidLink bar
Hydrostone at rigidLink beam
interface

dowel rod
rectangular cap beam
rigid offset

column

*Elastic stiffness for M-θ model calibrated to match

the results from system identification studies. 0.49 sec

OpenSees Days 2008

8
 9/11/2008

Simulations of 4-Span Bridge

10
Test 6 - Bent 1
Longitudinal Exp Sim
5
Drift Ratio (%)

-5

-10
5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (Sec)

10
Transverse

5
Drift Ratio (%)

-5

-10
5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (Sec)

OpenSees Days 2008

Simulations of 4-Span Bridge

10
Test 6 - Measured Response
Displacement (in.)

t = 11 sec
0

t = 10.85 sec

-10
South Abutment Bent 1 Bent 2 Bent 3 North Abutment

Plan View of North Abutment NW

During Pounding Event

t = 10.85 sec t = 11 sec

NE

OpenSees Days 2008

9
 9/11/2008

Simulations of 4-Span Bridge

8
Drift Ratio (%)

4 Bent 1 - Exp

0
-4

-8
5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (sec)

10
Displacement (in.)

Experiment
t = 11.29 sec

0
t = 11 sec

-10
South Abutment Bent 1 Bent 2 Bent 3 North Abutment

10
Displacement (in.)

Simulation
t = 11.29 sec

t = 11 sec
-10
South Abutment Bent 1 Bent 2 Bent 3 North Abutment
Location Along Bridge Deck

OpenSees Days 2008

Challenges in Modeling the Response

of the 4-Span Bridge
• Accumulation of damage prior to Test 4D, the first
test considered in the simulations.
• Use of bridge restrainers for several tests prior to
Test 4D as part of a NEES payload project.
• Interaction between the bridge and the compliant
hydraulic system of the actuator.
• Rotation of the abutment during pounding events.
• Contact between the bridge deck and abutment for
a finite period of time during pounding.

OpenSees Days 2008

10
 9/11/2008

Ongoing Work

• Bins of ground motions with different magnitude

and distance are considered.
• Soil parameters based on centrifuge tests.
• Abutment response using data from UCSD test.

OpenSees Days 2008

Abutment Model

uniaxialMaterial HyperbolicGapMaterial $matTag $Kmax $Kur $Rf $Fult $gap

400
Resisting Force (kN) per meter of abutment width

300 Based on shaking table tests by

Wilson and Elgamal at UCSD.
200

100 x
F ( x) =
1 x
0
+ Rf
K max Fult

-100
Recommended values:
-200 K ur Kmax = 20300 kN/m of abutment width
Kur = Kmax for unloading/reloading stiffness
-300 Rf = 0.7
Fult = -326 kN per meter of abutment width
-400
-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1
Displacement (m)

OpenSees Days 2008

11
 9/11/2008

Acknowledgments

University of Nevada, Reno University of Washington

Prof. Saiid Saiidi Prof. Marc Eberhard
Dr. Nathan Johnson Dr. Tyler Ranf
Robby Nelson Prof. Pedro Arduino
Dr. Patrick Laplace Dr. Hyungsuk Shin

University of California, Berkeley University of California, San Diego

Prof. Greg Fenves Prof. Ahmed Elgamal
Dr. Frank McKenna Patrick Wilson
Dr. Silvia Mazzoni

OpenSees Days 2008

Questions?

dryden@berkeley.edu

OpenSees Days 2008

12