Experimental Vibration Analysis for Civil Engineering Structures

403

Dynamic response of the painter street overpass at different levels

of ground shaking
C.E. Ventura & K. Mirza
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

ABSTRACT: The strong motion instrumentation at the Painter Street Overpass in Northern
California has recorded a significant number of earthquake records during the last two decades.
In addition to that, detailed ambient vibration tests have been conducted at this bridge, one in
the early 1980s and one in the mid 1990s. Several studies in the past have attempted to explain
the behavior of the bridge at different levels of shaking, but a detailed examination of both the
strong motion records and their comparison with the ambient vibration results remains to be
done, especially in terms of how soil-structure interaction affects the mode shapes and damping
of the system. This paper presents the results of a detailed comparison between the dynamic
properties of the bridge obtained from the various levels of strong motion records available and
the ambient vibration test results. A second part of this paper discusses how the mode shapes,
frequencies and damping values obtained from ambient vibration tests can be used to develop a
well calibrated finite element model of the bridge, which in turn, can be used as a base model to
evaluate the dynamic behavior of the bridge. The effectiveness of the calibrated model is
demonstrated by comparing its predicted linear response to that measured during the various
earthquakes recorded in the past.
1 INTROUDCTION
The Painter Street Overpass (PSO) is a two span, pre-stressed concrete box-girder bridge
constructed in 1973 over the four-flane US Highway 101 in Rio Dell, Northern California. Its
construction is typical of the type of California bridges used to span two or four lane highways
(Figure 1). The bridge is 15.85 m wide and 80.79 m long. The deck is a multi-cell box girder,
1.73 m thick and is supported on monolithic abutments at each end and two-pier bent that
divides the bridge into two spans of unequal length; one of the spans is 44.51 m long and the
other is 36.28 m long. The abutments and piers are supported by concrete friction piles and are
skewed at an angle of 38.9 degrees. Longitudinal movement of the west abutment is allowed by
means of a thermal expansion joint at the foundation level. The piers are about 7.32 m high,
each supported by 20 concrete friction piles. The east and west abutments are supported by 14
and 16 piles, respectively.

404

EVACES07

Figure 1. PSO Bridge

1.1 Bridge instrumentation and recorded earthquakes

The bridge was instrumented in 1977 as a collaborative effort between the California Strong
Motion Instrumentation Program (CSMIP) in the Division of Mines and Geology of the
California Geological Survey and CALTRANS to record and study strong motion records from
selected bridges in California. Twenty strong motion accelerometers were installed on and off
the bridge as shown in Figure 2. The instrumentation has recorded several earthquakes since its
installation. The 10 most significant earthquakes recorded so far are summarized in Table 1.

Figure 2. PSO Bridge sensor layout

405

Experimental Vibration Analysis for Civil Engineering Structures

Table 1: Significant earthquakes recorded at painter street overpass (1977-1992)

Earthquake

Date

Mag.
(ML)

Epic. Dist.
(km)

FF Accel.
(g)

Struct. Accel.
(g)

Trinidad Offshore

8 Nov 1980

6.9

88

0.15

0.17

Rio Dell

16 Dec1982

4.4

15

--

0.42

Eureka

24 Aug
1983

5.5

61

--

0.22

Cape Mendocino-1

21 Nov
1986

5.1

32

0.43

0.40

Cape Mendocino-2

21 Nov
1986

5.1

26

0.14

0.35

Cape Mendocino

31 Jul 1987

5.5

28

0.14

0.34

Cape Mendocino Petrolia

25 Apr 1992

6.9

6.4

0.54

1.09

Cape Mendocino - Petrolia

(AS1)

26 Apr 1992

6.2

6.2

0.52

0.76

Cape Mendocino - Petrolia

(AS2)

26 Apr 1992

6.5

6.4

0.26

0.31

2 AMBIENT VIBRATION TEST

An extensive ambient vibration study of the Painter Street Overpass was conducted by Ventura
et al. 1992, and some of the most significant findings of that study are presented here. The
frequencies of the fundamental modes of vibration in the vertical and transverse directions of
the bridge have been identified at 3.40 Hz and 4.10 Hz, respectively (Table 2). The main source
of dynamic excitation for the structure during this investigation was vehicle traffic. Since the
vertical modes of vibration of a bridge are generally well excited by traffic, these modes could
be easily identified. A significant number of locations on and off the bridge were measured in
order to evaluate the potential coupling between vertical and lateral modes (Figure 3), and the
relative amplitude of the excitations in the vertical and lateral direction had to be accounted for
during the data interpretation process.
The salient features of recorded strong motions at the PSO were evaluated and compared with
the recorded ambient vibration motions. The comparative analyses showed that the events
investigated excited the vertical modes of vibration of the bridge more than its transverse modes
of vibration. The results indicated that the superstructure exhibited a nearly elastic response for
all the events and that the fundamental frequency in each principal direction tended to lower
values as the level of shaking increased. The first vertical and first lateral mode shapes are
shown in Figure 4.
The ambient vibration results were also compared with those obtained from a series of
ambient vibration tests conducted more than twenty five years ago (CALTRANS, Gates and
Smith, 1982). As shown in Table 2, the fundamental frequencies obtained from the 1993 tests
are lower than those determined from the1982 tests, but these differences could be attributed to
environmental conditions affecting the measurements during each test.

406

EVACES07

Figure 3. Location of the Sensors for the Ambient Vibration Test

Table 2. Ambient Vibration Results for PSO Bridge
Mode

1982 Study

Vertical 1
3.61
Vertical 2
---Vertical 3
---Vertical 4
7.28*
Transverse 1
4.49
Transverse 2
---Transverse 3
7.42
*Identified as second vertical mode

1993 Study

Change

3.40
4.92
6.02
7.10
4.10
5.98
8.60

-6%
----3%
----9%
--+16%

Using the ambient vibration results as a reference point for the analysis of the strong motion
records, system identification was performed for all the recorded earthquakes. Two methods
were used for extracting the results using the computer program ARTeMIS (2004). First, the
Enhanced Frequency Domain Decomposition, EFDD, peak picking method, which is based on a
frequency domain analysis, allows determination of natural frequencies and associated mode
shapes and damping ratios. Second, the Stochastic Subspace Identification, SSI, is based on
time domain analysis and can give the values of damping ratios. Because of the algorithms used
to analyze the data, it is expected that the results shown in Table 3. be different for each
method. In addition, the results from Trinidad earthquake were not considered reliable because
channels #4 and #7 did not record any data during the event. Mirza (2006) provides further
details on the analysis of the strong motion data.
By comparing the natural frequencies derived from different earthquakes, it can be assessed if
the earthquake shaking has altered the structural system in a significant manner, and trigger a
further investigation to determine if structural damage has occurred. The results obtained using
the FDD and SSI methods are shown in Table 3. The table shows that the natural frequencies of
the bridge changed significantly during the Cap Mendocino-1 earthquake and that the first
natural frequency changed significantly during the Petrolia earthquake. Some of natural
frequencies could not be extracted for certain earthquakes; mainly because the earthquake
shaking did not have enough energy in the frequency range of the modes of interest.
In addition to the earthquakes system identification analysis, a series of analysis with the aim
of finding the natural frequency of the site where the bridge is located were done using

407

Experimental Vibration Analysis for Civil Engineering Structures

Nakamuras method (Onur, Ventura, and Hao, 2004). The results of these analyses are shown in
Figure 5. The results show that the first and the second natural frequencies of the site are around
0.9-1 Hz (Vertical) and 1.6-1.8 Hz (North-South), respectively. These frequencies are clearly far
from the structural natural frequencies of the PSO. Goel (1997) showed that the transverse
frequency of the bridge dropped from 4.10 Hz to 1.7 Hz during the Petrolia 92 earthquake, but
from the present analyses it is clear that the 1.7 Hz is the transverse frequency of the site, and
not a structural frequency.

MODE 1

MODE 2
Figure 4. The Mode Shapes derived by the Ambient Vibration Test, 1992
Table 3. PSO frequencies and damping ratios obtained from recorded earthquakes
Accel. (g)
1st Mode
Mag.
Dist.
Earthquake
Method
Freq.

(ML)
(km)
(Date)
FF
Str.
Hz
(%)
Trinidad
EFDD
3.271
--Offshore
6.9
88
0.15
0.17
(8 Nov 1980)
SSI
3.194
1.17
Rio Dell
(16 Dec 1982)

4.4

Cape
Mendocino-1
(21Nov1986)

5.1

Cape
Mendocino-2
(21Nov1986)

5.1

Cape
Mendocino Petrolia
(25 Ap1992)

6.9

Cape
Mendocino Petrolia (AS1)
(26 Apr 1992)

6.2

Cape
Mendocino Petrolia (AS2)
(26 Apr1992)

6.5

15

32

26

24

42

41

--

.43

.14

.54

.52

.26

2nd Mode
Freq.

Hz
(%)
3.955

---

3.864

4.65

EFDD

3.369

---

3.857

---

SSI

3.395

1.60

4.097

3.56

EFDD

3.369

---

4.053

---

SSI

3.267

3.06

3.596

4.72

EFDD

3.320

---

4.053

---

SSI

3.375

2.10

4.021

4.12

EFDD

3.125

---

4.05

---

SSI

3.147

3.92

---

---

EFDD

3.027

---

---

---

SSI

3.027

4.02

---

---

EFDD

3.174

---

4.150

---

SSI

3.060

1.471

4.013

---

.42

.40

.35

1.09

.76

.31

408

EVACES07

Figure 5. Normalized V/H Ratio vs. Frequency (Hz) for Ambient Vibration (left) Test and the Cape
Mendocino Earthquake (right)

3 FINITE ELEMENT MODEL CALIBRATION

The as-built detail drawings provided by CALTRANS were used to develop a finite element
(FE) model of the PSO. A 3-D finite element model was developed using the SAP2000 V9
program. This FE model included soil-structure interaction. The geometry and materials
specifications of the bridge were modeled as per the as-built drawings and the piles beneath the
structure were modeled as translational springs.
The FE model was calibrated with the ambient vibration results so that a good match between
periods and mode shapes of the FE model and the ambient tests was obtained (Ventura et al.,
1995). Two main parameters were considered for model calibration. The first one was the
structural mass and the second one was the stiffness of the structure, the soil and the piles. The
ability of SAP2000 program is good enough to have a mass distribution like the real bridge.
Also the stiffness values of the structure can be realistically defined (e.g. rigidity of the joints
and the connections), but the stiffness values of the soil and the piles (stiffness of the springs)
should be calibrated by judgment.
Table 4 shows the comparison between the FE model and ambient Vibration results. The
mode shapes comparisons (the first and the second) are shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7.
After matching the dynamic specifications of the model with those of the actual structure,
three of the recorded earthquakes (Trinidad 80, Cape Mendocino 86 and Petrolia 92) were
chosen for a series of linear time history analyses. The model responses were compared with the
recorded motions (Figure 8 to 10).
The comparisons show a good match between the responses of the actual records and the
results from the analyses. The difference between the peaks is because of the modal damping
ratios considered in the model were not calibrated. The Trinidad 80 event (Fig. 8) shows very
good match between results. Since this is a low level amplitude earthquake, the behavior of the
structure is close to that at the ambient vibration level. The Cape Mendocino and The Petrolia
earthquakes represent the medium and severe shaking levels, respectively. The results from the
analyses show that the behavior of the structure can be predicted very well even for a structure
which has been shaken several times during its life span (Figs 9 and 10). Petrolia 92 results in
Figure 10 shows significant differences, indicating that significant nonlinear response of the
whole system occurred during this event. Since no severe structural damage was observed
during this event, it can be concluded that the source of the nonlinearities was on the behavior of
the supporting soil.

409

Experimental Vibration Analysis for Civil Engineering Structures

Table 4: Comparison between the Ambient Vibration and the FE model Results
Mode
1-Vertical
2-Transverse
3-Vertical
4-Vertical
5-Transverse
6-Vertical

Frequency-(Period) by
SAP2000
Hz - (Sec)
3.38-(0.296)
4.16-(0.240)
5.07-(0.197)
5.88-(0.170)
6.02-(0.166)
7.35-(0.136)

Figure 6. First Mode (Vertical)-by SAP2000 & ARTeMIS

Figure 7. Second Mode (Transverse)-by SAP2000 & ARTeMIS

Frequency-(Period) by
ARTeMIS
Hz - (Sec)
3.40-(0.294)
4.10-(0.244)
4.92-(0.203)
6.02-(0.166)
5.97-(0.167)
7.10-(0.141)

410

EVACES07

Channel 5
60
40
20
0
-20
Max 37.7 at 11.1

-40

Record Min -40.9 at 8.2

Max 50.33 at 8.4

Min -44.9 at 10.7

-60
0

Analysis

10

12

Figure 8. Comparison between Record and Analysis -Vertical Acceleration (cm/s2) vs. Time (sec)Trinidad Offshore Earthquake

Channel 9

300
200
100
0
-100
-200

Record

Max 157.5 at 2.7

Min -210.5 at 2.5
Max 288.7 at 2.7
Min -242.9 at 2.6

Analysis

-300
1

10

Figure 9. Comparison between Record and Analysis -Transverse Acceleration (cm/s2) vs. Time (sec)Cape Mendocino 86-1 Earthquake

Channel 9
800
600
400
200
0
-200
-400
Record

-600

Max 624.9 at 5.2

Min -672.7 at 5.0
Max 518.1 at 5.1
Min -701.3 at 4.9

Analysis

-800
4

10

12

14

16

Figure 10. Comparison between Record and Analysis -Transverse Acceleration (cm/s2) vs. Time (sec)Petrolia 92 Earthquake

Experimental Vibration Analysis for Civil Engineering Structures

411

4 CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, behavior of a calibrated FE model of PSO Bridge using the ambient vibration test
results was presented. The natural frequencies and mode shapes of FE model matched those
from field test. Soil-structure interaction was included in the FE modelling. Three linear
dynamic analyses were conducted, using the earthquakes that the bridge had experienced before.
Trinidad, Cape Mendocino 86 and Petrolia 92 earthquakes were the lowest, the medium and the
highest levels of shaking the bridge has experienced. The Trinidad and the Cape Mendocino 86
results matched up with the real response of the structure, but the Petrolia 92 results showed
significant differences, indicating that significant nonlinear response of the whole system
occurred during this event. Since no severe structural damage was observed during this event, it
can be concluded that the source of the nonlinearities was on the behavior of the supporting soil.
5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The financial support for this project was provided by the Natural Sciences and Engineering
Research Council of Canada with additional funding from the Ministry of Transportation and
Highways (MoT) of British Columbia. The authors gratefully thank Ms. Sharlie Huffman of
MoT for her motivation and support for this study.
6 REFERENCES
1. ARTeMIS Extractor Pro., (2004), Manual, Release 3.41, Structural Vibration Solutions, Denmark.
2. Goel R. K., (1997), Earthquake Characteristics of Bridges with Integral Abutments, Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE, P 1435-1443.
3. Gates J. H. and Escalante L. E., (1985), Priorities for Installation of Lifeline Facilities
Instrumentation, California Seismic Safety Commission Strong-Motion Instrumentation Advisory
Committee.
4. Onur T., Ventura C. E. & Hao K. X.-S., (2004), Site Period Estimation in Fraser River Delta using
Microtremor Measurements-Experimental and Analytical Studies, 13th World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C, Canada.
5. Peeters B. & Ventura C. E., (2003), Comparative Study of Modal Analysis Techniques for Bridge
Dynamic Characteristics, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, pp. 965-988.
6. SAP2000, (2005), Manual, Version 9 Computers and Structure Inc., UC of Berkeley, USA.
7. Ventura C.E., Finn W. D. L. & Felber A. J., (1995), Dynamic Testing on Painter Street Overpass,
Procs. of 7th Canadian Conf. on Earthquake Eng., Montreal, Canada. pp. 787-794.
8. Mirza K., (2006), Seismic Structural Health Monitoring of Bridges, Ph.D. Thesis, UBC, Vancouver,
Canada.

412

EVACES07