Abstract
Bridge infrastructure is susceptible to damage from a large host of threats including natural hazards, aging and deterioration, and demands that increase with population growth and urbanization. Life cycle management of bridge infrastructure requires an understanding of the relative contribution of these threats to the risk of damage or impending consequences, such as life cycle costs. Traditionally, limited attention has been given to understanding the hazard risk profile to bridge infrastructure, defined as the relative risks posed by multiple hazards and the synergies or trade-offs in protecting for different hazards. Furthermore, effective strategies are needed to jointly consider cumulative damage (e.g., from aging) and punctuated damage (e.g., from natural hazards) when assessing the influence of design or upgrade decisions that may mitigate risks from multiple potentially competing hazards. This chapter utilizes metamodels as an efficient strategy for developing parameterized time-dependent bridge fragilities for multiple hazards, thereby facilitating multi-hazard risk assessment and life cycle management. Threats considered in the case studies include earthquakes, hurricanes, aging and deterioration, and live loads. The applications illustrate the relative contribution of earthquake and hurricane hazards to the risk of losses given variation in bridge parameters, the influence of considering aging when assessing the hazard risk profile, and the impact of concurrent threats (e.g., truck and earthquake) on the life cycle risk.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
AASHTO. (2008). Guide specifications for bridges vulnerable to coastal storms, Washington, DC, American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials.
Ataei, N., Stearns, M., & Padgett, J. E. (2010). Response sensitivity for probabilistic damage assessment of coastal bridges under surge and wave loading. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2202(1), 93–101.
Bradley, B. A., Dhakal, R. P., Cubrinovski, M., Mander, J. B., & MacRae, G. A. (2007). Improved seismic hazard model with application to probabilistic seismic demand analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 36(14), 2211–2225.
Choe, D.-E., Gardoni, P., Rosowsky, D., & Haukaas, T. (2008). Probabilistic capacity models and seismic fragility estimates for RC columns subject to corrosion. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 93(3), 383–393. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2006.12.015.
Choe, D.-E., Gardoni, P., Rosowsky, D., & Haukaas, T. (2009). Seismic fragility estimates for reinforced concrete bridges subject to corrosion. Structural Safety, 31(4), 275–283.
Cristianini, N., & Shawe-Taylor, J. (2000). An introduction to support vector machines and other kernel-based learning methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Decò, A., & Frangopol, D. M. (2011). Risk assessment of highway bridges under multiple hazards. Journal of Risk Research, 14(9), 1057–1089. doi:10.1080/13669877.2011.571789.
Der Kiureghian, A. (2005). Non-ergodicity and PEER’s framework formula. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 34(13), 1643–1652. doi:10.1002/eqe.504.
DuraCrete. (2000). Statistical quantification of the variables in the limit state function. Report No. BE95-1347/R9.
Ellingwood, B., Rosowsky, D., Li, Y., & Kim, J. (2004). Fragility assessment of light-frame wood construction subjected to wind and earthquake hazards. Journal of Structural Engineering, 130(12), 1921–1930. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:12(1921).
Fernandez, J. A., & Rix, G. J. (2008). Seismic hazard analysis and probabilistic ground motions in the upper Mississippi embayment. In Geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics (Vol. IV, pp. 1–10). doi:10.1061/40975(318)8.
Friedman, J. H. (1991). Multivariate adaptive regression splines. Annals of Statistics, 19(1), 1–67. doi:10.2307/2241837.
Gardoni, P., Der Kiureghian, A., & Mosalam, K. M. (2002). Probabilistic capacity models and fragility estimates for reinforced concrete columns based on experimental observations. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 128(10), 1024--1038.
Gardoni, P., Mosalam, K. M., & der Kiureghian, A. (2003). Probabilistic seismic demand models and fragility estimates for RC bridges. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 7(spec01), 79–106.
Ghosh, J., Caprani, C. C., & Padgett, J. E. (2014). Influence of traffic loading on the seismic reliability assessment of highway bridge structures. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000535, 04013009.
Ghosh, J., & Padgett, J. E. (2010). Aging considerations in the development of time-dependent seismic fragility curves. Journal of Structural Engineering, 136(12), 1497–1511.
Ghosh, J., & Padgett, J. E. (2011). Probabilistic seismic loss assessment of aging bridges using a component-level cost estimation approach. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 40(15), 1743–1761. doi:10.1002/eqe.1114.
Hardy, R. L. (1971). Multiquadric equations of topography and other irregular surfaces. Journal of Geophysical Research, 76(8), 1905–1915. doi:10.1029/JB076i008p01905.
Itoh, Y., & Gu, H. (2009). Prediction of aging characteristics in natural rubber bearings used in bridges. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 14(2), 122–128.
Jekabsons, G. (2010). Adaptive basis function construction: An approach for adaptive building of sparse polynomial regression models. In Y. Zhang (Ed.), Machine learning (pp. 127–155), INTECH Open Access Publisher.
Kameshwar, S., & Padgett, J. E. (2014). Multi-hazard risk assessment of highway bridges subjected to earthquake and hurricane hazards. Engineering Structures, 78, 154–166.
Kohavi, R., & Provost, F. (1998). Glossary of terms. Machine Learning, 30(2–3), 271–274.
Lee, G. C., Liang, Z., Shen, J. J., & O’Connor, J. S. (2011). Extreme load combinations: A survey of state bridge engineers. MCEER, Buffalo.
Li, Y., & Ellingwood, B. (2009). Framework for multihazard risk assessment and mitigation for wood-frame residential construction. Journal of Structural Engineering, 135(2), 159–168. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445.
Li, Y., & van de Lindt, J. W. (2012). Loss-based formulation for multiple hazards with application to residential buildings. Engineering Structures, 38, 123–133.
Liang, Z., & Lee, G. C. (2013a). Bridge pier failure probabilities under combined hazard effects of scour, truck and earthquake. Part I: Occurrence probabilities. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 12(2), 229–240.
Liang, Z., & Lee, G. C. (2013b). Bridge pier failure probabilities under combined hazard effects of scour, truck and earthquake. Part II: Failure probabilities. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 12(2), 241–250.
Mackie, K. R., Wong, J.-M., & Stojadinović, B. (2008). Integrated probabilistic performance-based evaluation of benchmark reinforced concrete bridges. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
Mazzoni, S., McKenna, F., Scott, M. H., & Fenves, G. L. (2006). OpenSees command language manual. Mazzoni, Silvia, et al. OpenSees command language manual. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center, Berkeley.
McCullough, M., & Kareem, A. (2011). A framework for performance-based engineering in multi-hazard coastal environments. In Structures Congress 2011, April 14--16 2011 Las Vegas, Nevada. (pp. 1961–1972). ASCE.
McKay, M. D., Beckman, R. J., & Conover, W. J. (1979). Comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics, 21(2), 239–245.
Nielson, B. G. (2005). Analytical fragility curves for highway bridges in moderate seismic zones. PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.
Panagiotakos, T. B., & Fardis, M. N. (2001). Deformations of reinforced concrete members at yielding and ultimate. ACI Structural Journal, 98(2), 135--148.
Pavlov, Y. L. (2000). Random forests. VSP, Utrecht.
Petersen, M. D., Frankel, A. D., Harmsen, S. C., Mueller, C. S., Haller, K. M., Wheeler, R. L., et al. (2008). Documentation for the 2008 update of the United States national seismic hazard maps. US Geological Survey.
Ramanathan, K., DesRoches, R., & Padgett, J. E. (2012). A comparison of pre- and post-seismic design considerations in moderate seismic zones through the fragility assessment of multispan bridge classes. Engineering Structures, 45, 559–573.
Scheffner, N. W., & Carson, F. C. (2001). Coast of South Carolina storm surge study. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory.
Wang, Z., Padgett, J. E., & Dueñas-Osorio, L. (2014). Risk-consistent calibration of load factors for the design of reinforced concrete bridges under the combined effects of earthquake and scour hazards. Engineering Structures, 79, 86–95.
Wen, Y. K., & Wu, C. L. (2001). Uniform hazard ground motions for mid‐America cities. Earthquake Spectra, 17(2), 359–384. doi:10.1193/1.1586179.
Yin, Y.-J., & Li, Y. (2011). Probabilistic loss assessment of light-frame wood construction subjected to combined seismic and snow loads. Engineering Structures, 33(2), 380–390. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.10.018.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge the support of this research by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant No. CMMI-1055301. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. The authors would also like to acknowledge computational facilities provided by the Data Analysis and Visualization Cyberinfrastructure (NSF grant OCI-0959097).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Padgett, J.E., Kameshwar, S. (2016). Supporting Life Cycle Management of Bridges Through Multi-Hazard Reliability and Risk Assessment. In: Gardoni, P., LaFave, J. (eds) Multi-hazard Approaches to Civil Infrastructure Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29713-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29713-2_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-29711-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-29713-2
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)