ACI Committee 341-C

State-of-the-Art Summary
Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit
Techniques for Concrete Bridges
Committee 341-C
Retrofit of Concrete Bridges
Sub-committee members:
Dawn Lehman and Sri Sritharan (co-chairs)
Adolfo Matamoros, Anthony Powers, David
Sander (authors)
Ayman Salama, Raj Valluvan, Eric Williamson
Additional Contributions:
Photographs: NISEE Image Database
Analysis of SR-99: WashDOT
UW: Blake Inouye, John Stanton, Dawn Lehman
1971 San Fernando
Bridge Damage in Previous Earthquakes
1989 Loma Prieta
Bridge Damage in Previous Earthquakes
1994 Northridge
Bridge Damage in Previous Earthquakes
1995 Kobe
Bridge Damage in Previous Earthquakes
Report Objectives
Describe key aspects of seismic retrofit
program
General understanding of each phase
Conceptual design and analysis methods
Emphasize design for structural stability
Rich resource of appropriate references
Resource Evaluation
Multi-Phase Program
IMPLEMENTATION
Member Response
Global Response
SELECTION AND
DESIGN OF RETROFIT
MEASURES
SEISMIC
EVALUATION
OF EXISTING
SYSTEM
System Capacity
Seismic Demand
Demand/Capacity Ratio
Phases of Retrofit Program
SEISMIC
VULNERABILITY
EVALUATION
Seismic Hazard
Structural Vulnerabilities
Socio-Economic Consequences
Phases of Retrofit Program:
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation
Local Soil Conditions
Soil Response and Failure
Source
Path
Site
Evaluation of Site-Specific Hazard
Phases of Retrofit Program:
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation
Geometry
Date of Design and Construction
Evaluation of Structural Vulnerability
Phases of Retrofit Program:
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation
Evaluation of Socio-Economic Consequences
Casualties
Lifeline Interruption
Economic Impact
Phases of Retrofit Program:
Seismic Demand/Capacity Evaluation
Determine as-built conditions
Existing material properties
Estimate capacity of components
Evaluation of Seismic Capacity
(Priestley et al., 1994)
Phases of Retrofit Program:
Seismic Demand/Capacity Evaluation
Established Analysis Methods
Linear or Nonlinear
Multi-Spectra or Time-History
Evaluation of Seismic Demand
Period
A
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
T
Phases of Retrofit Program:
Seismic Demand/Capacity Evaluation
D
Determine Demand/Capacity Ratios
Global Displacement
Local Deformations and Forces
Phases of Retrofit Program:
Seismic Retrofit Measures
Based on Demand/Capacity Evaluation
Select at Member and/or System Level
Address Global Response
Phases of Retrofit Program:
Implementation
Multi-Phase Retrofit Programs
Depends on State and DOT
Figure 1.2 Typical Cable Restrainer System
Courtesy of the University of Washington
Figure 1.2 Typical Cable Restrainer System
Courtesy of the University of Washington

Initial Retrofit Measures
Cable Restrainer
More Costly Measures:
Beam and Column Retrofit
Sri Sritharan
Tony Powers
SELECTION AND
DESIGN OF
RETROFIT
MEASURES
SEISMIC
EVALUATION
OF EXISTING
SYSTEM
Adolfo Matamoros
Presentation of Report
SEISMIC
VULNERABILITY
EVALUATION
David Sanders
INTRODUCTION
CONCLUSIONS
EDITING
Dawn Lehman
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation
Bridge Geometry
Structural Redundancy
Expansion Joints
Age of Design ~ Vulnerable Elements
Structural Condition
Condition of Supporting Soil
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation
Bridge Geometry
Bent Configurations
Degree of Skew or Curvature
Flared Columns
Short Seat Widths
Multi-Level Systems
Multiple
Superstructure
Types
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation
Vulnerable Elements
Columns
Cap Beams
Joints
Foundations
Hinges and Supports
Superstructure
Abutments
Inadequate Confinement
Inadequate Shear Strength
Location and Strength of Lap Splices
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation
Vulnerable Elements
Columns
Cap Beams
Joints
Foundations
Hinges and Supports
Superstructure
Abutments
Reduced Flexural Strength
(Insufficient Bar Anchorage)
Inadequate Shear Strength
Inadequate Strength in Torsion
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation
Vulnerable Elements
Columns
Cap Beams
Joints
Foundations
Hinges and Supports
Superstructure
Abutments
Insufficient Bar Anchorage
Inadequate Shear Strength
Inadequate Joint Steel
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation
Vulnerable Elements
Columns
Cap Beams
Joints
Foundations
Hinges and Supports
Superstructure
Abutments
Insufficient Flexural Strength
Inadequate Shear Strength
Inadequate Anchorage
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation
Vulnerable Elements
Columns
Cap Beams
Joints
Foundations
Hinges and Supports
Superstructure
Abutments
Insufficient Seat Length
Bearing Instability
Seismic Vulnerability Evaluation
Vulnerable Elements
Columns
Cap Beams
Joints
Foundations
Hinges and Supports
Superstructure
Abutments
Lack of Transverse Shear Keys
Damage from Skewed Bridges
Settlement
Seismic Evaluation
Seismic Demand
Seismic Capacity
Demand/Capacity Ratios
Seismic Evaluation:
Seismic Demand
Determine Appropriate Analysis Method
Linear
Nonlinear
Develop Model
Evaluate Demands for Design
Earthquakes

Seismic Demand Evaluation:
Appropriate Analysis Method
Linear
Single-Mode Response Spectrum
Simple System
Regular Mass and Stiffness
Multi-Mode Response Spectra
More Complex System
Irregular Mass, Stiffness Geometry
Time History
Complex System
Soil Springs/Dampers

Seismic Demand Evaluation:
Appropriate Analysis Method
Nonlinear Analysis Methods
Limit or Pushover Analysis
Demands on System (Target Displacement)
Paired with a Dynamic Analysis
Stand Alone Frame Analysis
Provides Information on Nonlinear Behavior
Neglects Frame and Abutment Interaction
Time History Analysis

Example of:
Appropriate Analysis Method
SR-99 Bridge
Partial Retrofit
Different
Superstructure
Systems
Retrofit Outrigger
Joints and
Beams?
Example of:
Appropriate Analysis Method
Time-History Analysis
Gap Elements
Soil Springs
Abutment North + Off-ramp
Steel South
North
Steel
Off-ramp
Abutment
Steel & South
Concrete Structures
Example of:
Appropriate Analysis Method
Modeling Issues
Material Strengths
Effective Stiffness Values
Stiffness of Jacketed Columns
Model of Superstructure
Stiffness of Adjacent Structures
Soil Springs and Dampers
Example of Appropriate Analysis Method:
Model Verification
Red Gaps = Closed
Gap Closures
Predicted: 72 yr. EQ Actual: Nisqually EQ
Example of:
Appropriate Analysis Method
Analysis Results:
Drift Demands in Outrigger Joints
ID Yielding Columns

From Capacity Evaluation:
Joint Shear Stress Demands
Beam Torsion Demands
Beam Shear Demands

Seismic Evaluation:
Seismic Capacity
Determine Expected Material Strengths
Overstrength in Concrete: Aging
Overstrength in Steel: Strain-Hardening,
Material
Calculate Element Capacities
Calculate Flexural Capacities
Calculate Shear Strength
Calculate Anchorage or Development
Strength

Seismic Capacity/Demand Evaluation
1. Calculate D/C Ratios for All Elements

2. Determine Critical Failure
Modes/Elements

3. Determine Appropriate Retrofit Measures


Example of:
Demand/Capacity Evaluation
Critical Elements
Beam in Torsion
Exterior
Anchorage in
Joint
Retrofit Measure
Steel Jacketing
Beams & Joints
Sri Sritharan
Tony Powers
SELECTION AND
DESIGN OF RETROFIT
MEASURES
SEISMIC
EVALUATION
OF EXISTING
SYSTEM
Adolfo Matamoros
Presentation of Report
SEISMIC
VULNERABILITY
EVALUATION
David Sanders
ACI Subcommittee 341C
STATE OF THE ART SUMMARY ON
SEISMIC RETROFIT TECHNIQUES
FOR CONCRETE BRIDGES

Retrofit design philosophy
Avoid excessive damage to
members and prevent
structural collapse of the bridge
Objective
Satisfy strength and displacement
demands expected under the design-level
earthquakes.
Ensure a desirable yield mechanism
Limit inelastic actions to preselected locations
Column ends are typically selected in bridges
Avoid non-ductile response modes (e.g.,
shear and bond failure; inelastic response of
non-ductile members)
Procedure
Provide sufficient ductility capacity to the
potential plastic hinge regions in columns
Strengthen other members using capacity
design principles using the column
overstrength moments.
Add new elements
Reduce seismic demands to avoid
inelastic response in capacity-protected
members
Procedure (Cont..)
Complete retrofit design at member level
Analyze the retrofitted structure to ensure
adequate response of the system.
If necessary, redesign retrofit measures or
introduce a new retrofit scheme
Columns
Cap Beams
Joints
Footings
Hinges and Supports
Superstructure
Abutments
Vulnerable Structural Elements
Inadequate Confinement
Inadequate Shear Strength
Location and Strength of Lap Splices
Provide uniform pressure
Steel, concrete and advanced composites
Use wraps or jackets
Required over 1.5 to 2 times the length of
the plastic hinge region
Circular or oval shaped sections
Leave a gap between column and wrap
Fill gap with grout or concrete
Leave a gap between the column and joint
Confinement retrofit
(Courtesy of University of California, San Diego)
Confinement retrofit Circular column
(Courtesy of Jacobs Civil Inc.)
(Courtesy of University of California, San Diego)
Rectangular column

(Courtesy of Jacobs Civil Inc.)
US40/I64 Double deck seismic retrofit in St. Louis
Active prestressed wire wraps
and welded wire fabric
(Courtesy of Jacobs Civil Inc.)
Prefabricated composite
jacketing of column
(Courtesy of University of Southern California)

Improved Confinement Detail
Section with curvature ductility of 20
10% 75% increase in the effective
elastic stiffness
The new column stiffness should be
included in the system level analysis of the
retrofitted bridge
Non-Prismatic Columns
(Courtesy of University of Nevada, Reno)
U-shaped GFRP straps
FRP straps
Half shell steel jackets
(Courtesy of University of Nevada, Reno)
Flared Columns Retrofitted with U-shaped GFRP Straps
Construction at US 395/I 80
Interchange, Reno (Courtesy of University of Nevada, Reno)

Retrofitted Bent
Multi-Column Bents Transverse Direction
Column Lap Splice Retrofit
Control dilatation strains
Provide sufficient confinement
Confinement retrofit required for the
inelastic response may be sufficient
Rectangular sections are not effective
unless spliced bars are welded for continuity

Column Retrofit to improve
shear capacity
Estimate demands
assume full development of column hinge
Include material over-strength
Most techniques used for confinement
retrofit are appropriate
Retrofit is typically required along the full
column height
(Courtesy of FHWA)
CFRP
(Courtesy of University of California, San Diego)
Steel Jacket
Vulnerable Structural Elements
Columns
Cap Beams
Joints
Footings
Hinges and Supports
Superstructure
Abutments
Reduced Flexural Strength
(Insufficient Bar Anchorage)
Inadequate Shear Strength
Inadequate Strength in Torsion
Post-tensioning cap beam is an effective
retrofit measure
may require an increase in dimensions
may require addition of end blocks
will improve joint performance
will enhance torsional resistance
Concrete bolsters and new reinforcement
Steel jacket retrofit
FRP wraps
Cap Beam Retrofit Measures
Cap Beam Retrofit Prestressing
(Courtesy of Jacobs Civil Inc.) (Courtesy of University of California, San Diego)

Concrete
bolster
(Courtesy of University of California, Berkeley)
Adding Concrete Bolster
Reducing Seismic Demand

(Courtesy of University of California, San Diego)
Vulnerable Structural Elements
Columns
Cap Beams
Joints
Footings
Hinges and Supports
Superstructure
Abutments
Insufficient Bar Anchorage
Inadequate Shear Strength
Inadequate Joint Steel
External prestressing
Complete replacement of the joint region
increase in dimensions
Increase in column bar embedment length
new joint shear reinforcement
Jacketing of the joint using concrete, steel
or composite materials
Reduce demand using a link beam
Joint Retrofit Measures
Joint Retrofit
(Courtesy of University of Utah)

(Courtesy of University of California, San Diego)
Complete Joint Replacement
(Courtesy of University of California, San Diego)