KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering (0000) 00(0):1-8

Copyright 2014 Korean Society of Civil Engineers

DOI 10.1007/s12205-014-0214-y

Structural Engineering

pISSN 1226-7988, eISSN 1976-3808

www.springer.com/12205

TECHNICAL NOTE

Seismic Response of Long Span Cable-stayed Bridge to

Near-fault Vertical Ground Motions
Bipin Shrestha*
Received April 14, 2013/Accepted January 16, 2014/Published Online July 28, 2014

Abstract
In design and analysis of seismic resistant structures and particularly the bridge structures vertical ground motion tends, in general,
to be ignored or underestimated. However, during recent earthquakes high amplitude of motions were recorded in vertical direction
near to the fault, invalidating such design assumptions of neglecting the vertical motion. This paper presents an analytical
investigation on the effect of the near fault vertical ground motions on seismic response of a long span cable-stayed bridge.
Responses of the bridge subjected to ground motions with and without vertical ground motion is carried using near fault ground
motions on three dimensional bridge model. A suite of five near field ground motion with varying V/H (Vertical to Horizontal) ratio
of peak ground acceleration is used. Influence of vertical motion on global and local structural response is presented. The study also
takes into consideration the arrival time of peak vertical motion which has received little attention previously. Effects of coincidence
of peak vertical motion with the peak horizontal motion in time domain are also analyzed. The study reveals that influence of vertical
motion on the seismic response of the Karnali Bridge is slight and coinciding peak vertical motion with peak horizontal motion also
have slighter effects compared to the motion without such coincidence.
Keywords: near fault earthquakes, vertical ground motion, cable-stayed bridge, structural response

1. Introduction
Civil engineering structures are subjected to three dimensional
ground motions. In past several decades horizontal earthquake
excitation has been studied extensively and considered in the
design process whereas the vertical component of earthquake
excitation has generally been neglected in design and analysis of
earthquake resistance structures. However, recent studies,
supported with increasing numbers of near-field records, indicate
that the ratio of peak vertical-to-horizontal ground acceleration
can exceed the usually adopted two-thirds. In recent years, more
and more near-fault recordings were acquired with prominent
vertical ground motions in the vicinity of the fault rupture and
also validated with many theoretical analyses (Papazoglou and
Elnashai, 1996). A very highlighted vertical peak ground acceleration
of 1.655g was recorded at the El Centro Array #6 station in 1979
Imperial Valley earthquake, with a ratio of 3.77 to horizontal
peak ground acceleration. This remarkable vertical ground motion
character also appeared in other earthquakes, for example; 1985
Nahanni earthquake, 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, 1994 Northridge earthquake, 1995 Kobe earthquake and 1999 Chi-Chi
earthquake. More recently very high acceleration in vertical
direction was measured during 2011 Tohoku, Japan earthquake
and 2011 Christchurch, New Zealand earthquake. The ratio of

vertical Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) to horizontal PGA

arrived at unity or even exceeded unity at many stations at nearfault regions during these events. Such near-fault data has
eventually changed the misleading assumption that the vertical
ground motion can be taken to be two-thirds of the horizontal
motion, as postulated earlier (Newmark et al., 1973). At short
periods and near-source distances, vertical component of the
ground motion may be noticeably more severe than the horizontal
component (Papazoglou and Elnashai, 1996).
In recent years numbers of studies have considered these facts
and significant effort has been invested to find out the characteristics of vertical ground motion and its effects on bridge structures.
Saadeghvaziri and Foutch (1991) reported that the variation of
axial forces due to vertical excitations reduced the energy
dissipating capacity of bridge columns and influenced the shear
capacity of the section. Papazoglou and Elnashai (1996) reported
analytical and field evidence of the damaging effect of vertical
ground motions on both building and highway bridge structures.
The authors concluded that strong vertical motions induced
significant fluctuations in axial forces in vertical elements leading
to a reduction of the column shear capacity. In certain cases,
compression failure of columns was also reported to be likely.
These observations were also confirmed through numerical
simulations. Later Elnashai and Papazoglou (1997) and Collier

*Ph.D. Candidate, Dept. of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, Curtin University, Kent Street, Bentley WA 6102, Australia (Corresponding Author, E-mail:
bipinsh01@gmail.com)
1

Bipin Shrestha

and Elnashai (2001) proposed simplified procedures to combine

vertical and horizontal ground motions. Both papers focus on
near-fault ground motions that have been recorded within 15 km
of the causative fault since these ground motions were observed
to possess significant vertical components. Moreover, it was
suggested to limit the damping ratio of elements susceptible to
vertical effects to 2%. This is because firstly, vertical ground
motions are associated with higher frequency oscillations and
hence lower damping. Secondly, there are limited hysteretic energy
dissipation mechanisms for vertical inelastic response than in the
case of transverse response. Button et al. (2002) examined
several parameters including ground motion and structural
system characteristics. Li et al. (2007) worked on the response
spectrum ratio based upon effect of pulse motion, earthquake
magnitude, site conditions and conclude that for a period of less
than 0.1sec the spectral ratios are significantly larger than the 2/3
value given in existing code, and the largest ratio of about 1.3
occurs when the pulse with the shortest duration is considered. The
authors also presented effect of vertical motion on bridge structures through analytical simulations. Recently, Kunnath et al.
(2007 and 2008) examined a two-span highway bridge with double
column bent considering six different structural configurations.
They found that the vertical component of ground motion causes
significant amplification in the axial force demand in the columns
and moment demands in the girder at both the mid-span and at
the face of the bent cap. The increase in girder moment due to
vertical motions caused the demand to exceed the capacity. The
latter also observed that the shear failure of the bridge column
could be possible due to fluctuating axial loads. Kim et al. (2008)
presented analytical and experimental investigation on effects of
vertical ground motion on reinforced concrete bridge pier.
One of the important features of near-fault ground motions is
the relationship between the arrival times of peak vertical motion
with the peak horizontal motion. However, presently very little
attention has been provided on this aspect of the ground motion.
In general, peak vertical ground motion occurs earlier than peak
horizontal motion, whereas in some cases the near coincidences
were found to be occurring in the time domain. In case of peak
vertical motion occurring significantly before or after the peak
horizontal motion, it might be assumed to put lesser demand on
the structure but when these two components are nearly
coinciding then it may put the structure in high level of distress.
Elnashai and Collier (2001) investigated the time interval by
using records from Imperial Valley (1979) and Morgan Hill (1984)
earthquakes. They considered 32 records at various distance with
similar site conditions. The study concluded that the time interval
increases with distance from the source and should be taken as
zero for a distance of 5 km from the source.
Studies on effect of vertical ground motion on cable-stayed
bridge are scarce (Valdebinito and Aparicio, 2006). Shrestha and
Tuladhar (2012) presented analytical investigation on effect of
vertical acceleration on seismic response of the steel tower and
cable of Karnali cable-stayed bridge. This paper presents an
extension of the study by the latter. In this paper, finding from an

extensive study on the combined effects of vertical and horizontal

earthquake motions is present. The study also takes into consideration the coincidence of peak vertical motion with the peak
horizontal motion on the dynamic response which presumably
could have adverse effect on the response of the bridge.

2. Description of the Bridge

Karnali cable stayed bridge is the first and till date only cablestayed bridge in Nepal and is constructed over the Karnali River,
the longest river in Nepal. The bridge site is situated at Chisapani
located about 500 Km west of Kathmandu, the capital city of
Nepal. The Karnali Bridge is a key structure connecting western
plains of Nepal with rest of the country. Moreover, it also serves
as link to reach many western mountains of the country. The
bridge has composite (steel-concrete) deck consisting two spans
with total length of 500 m. The bridge has single tower and two
asymmetric spans comprising of a main span of 325 m and a side
span of 175 m. The cables are arranged in two vertical planes
with 30 cables in each plane. A modified fan configuration has been
adopted for the cables. The stay cables are made of polyethylenesheathed strands composed of 7 mm diameter galvanized wires.
The steel-concrete composite deck construction has 3 m high
truss section and 228 mm thick concrete slab. The ratio of truss
height to span length is about 1/ 117. The bridge was completed
in 1993.The two-way roadway of the bridge deck is 11.3 m wide
with two lanes.

3. Analytical Model of the Bridge

To capture the realistic seismic behavior an elaborate model of
the bridge is required. Depending upon the element types and
degrees of freedom, different modeling strategies are possible. In
order to establish comprehensive finite element model for seismic
response study of the Karnali cable stayed, a full three dimensional
finite element model is developed in SAP 2000. The geometries
and member details are based upon the design information and
blueprint of the bridge. The main structural members of the bridge
are composed of stay cables, girders, floor beams, concrete slab
and steel towers, all of which are discretized by different finiteelement types in current model. Modeling of the stay cables is
possible in SAP 2000 by employing cable element and utilizing
its stress-stiffening capability. The pretensions of the cables are
incorporated by the initial strains of the element. The nonlinear
behavior of the cables are idealized using the equivalent modulus
approach in which, the equivalent tangential modulus of elasticity,
Eeq is given by Ernest (1965).
E
Eeq = --------------------------------- EA wl 2
1 + ------------------3
12T

(1)

where E is the material modulus of elasticity, L is the horizontal

projected length of the cable, w is the cable weight per unit

KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

Seismic Response of Long Span Cable-stayed Bridge to Near-fault Vertical Ground Motions

Fig. 1. (a) Photograph of the Karnali Bridge, (b) Finite Element Model of Cable-stayed Bridge

Fig. 2. Schematic Drawing of the Karnali Bridge

length, A is the cable cross sectional area and T is the cable

pretension force. It can be noticed that the nonlinearity of the
cable stays originates with an increase in the loading followed by
a decrease in the cable sag, consequently the apparent axial
stiffness of the cable increases. This cable-stayed bridge has 30
cables in each side.
Steel tower of the bridge and its pier with varying sectional
properties are represented in SAP 2000 using non-prismatic
frame element. Steel truss of the bridge was modeled using the
frame element. Shell elements are used to model the concrete
deck of the bridge. In addition, concentrated mass elements are
used to include the weight of nonstructural elements. A three
dimensional model is developed using 1015 joints, 2105 frame
elements, 495 shell elements and 2 rigid link for a total of 5998
degrees of freedom. Figs. 1(a) and 1(b) show a picture and the
finite element model of the Karnali Bridge developed in SAP
2000. Fig. 2 illustrates the schematic feature of the bridge with
the cable element numbers, starting from left to right, detailed
evaluation of which is presented in subsequent sections.

was conducted by Himalayan hydropower consultant for nearby

proposed Chisapani multipurpose dam in 1989. Three major faults
identified were namely; Main Boundary Thrust (MBT), Main
Central Thrust (MCT) and Siwalik fault. The MCT is situated in
the north most part of the Nepal at the distance of nearly 125 km
from the site. The estimated site ground motion due to the
maximum credible earthquake on MCT was 0.12 g. The MBT is
situated nearly 25 km north to the site and the seismologist team
considered this fault of fully capable of generating large to great
earthquake. The estimated site ground motion was 0.60 g. The
Siwalik fault, situated almost 8 km from the site is a thrust fault.
Plausible largest magnitude of earthquake that could occur on
this source was adjudged to be 6.5. Estimated site ground motion
due to the earthquake was 0.70 g.
In this study, however, ground motion arising due to plausible
seismic event in Siwalik fault only is considered. Thought the
seismic hazard study considered only the horizontal ground
motion components, recent events as already highlighted in this
paper, have clearly demonstrated that the vertical components

4. Input Ground Motions

Seismic hazard analysis of the Chisapani region, the bridge site,

Fig. 3. Averaged Response Spectrum of Selected Ground Motion

Table 1. Ground Motion Selected for the Analysis

No
1
2
3
4
5

Event
Gazli, Uzbekistan (1976)
Loma-Prieta, USA (1989)
Landers, USA (1992)
Kobe, Japan (1995)
Kobe, Japan (1995)

Vol. 00, No. 00 / 0000 0000

Mw
6.8
6.9
7.3
6.9
6.9

Station
Karakyr
LGPC
Lucerne valley
Nishi-Akashi
J R Takatori
3

PGA-Long (g)
0.71
0.56
0.68
0.51
0.61

PGA-Tran (g)
0.63
0.61
0.70
0.50
0.61

PGA-Ver (g)
1.34
0.89
0.66
0.37
0.24

V/H
1.89
1.47
0.94
0.73
0.39

Bipin Shrestha

could not be neglected. Therefore, in this study a suite of five

strong near field ground motion with 3 components of motions is
compiled. During the selection adequate care is taken to
represent similar level of shaking in terms of PGA in horizontal
direction (as given in Table 1), whereas vertical PGA varies
largely (from 0.24 g to 1.34 g) thus representing V/H ratio (peak
vertical motion to peak horizontal motion ratio) varying from
0.39 to 1.89. These ratios were assumed to reflect the uncertainty
of vertical ground motion in near earthquake field. All the
ground motions selected were recorded within 15 Km from the
fault. Fig. 3 presents the mean spectra of the selected ground
motions.

5. Numerical Analysis
5.1 Initial Equilibrium Condition
The Initial equilibrium condition of cable-stayed bridges is the
equilibrium condition due to dead load and tension forces in the
cables. The subsequent modal analysis and the nonlinear time
history analysis should start considering the dead load deformed
equilibrium condition. The design cable tensions are first applied
to the each cable and the static nonlinear analysis under dead
load is carried out. Comparisons of the calculated deck alignment
are made with the actual deck alignment. The cable tensions are
then adjusted iteratively by manipulating the cable strain until
the best match is achieved between the calculated and actual
deck alignment.
5.2 Natural Vibration Analysis
The natural period of the bridge is one of the most crucial
factors in order to understand the seismic behavior of the cablestayed bridge. Fundamental period of the bridge is calculated to
be 3.736 sec and is deck transverse (lateral bending) mode. The
first vertical deck bending mode is at 3.22 sec. Fundamental
period of the Steel tower is found to be 1.66 sec. Natural modes
up to 50.80 Hz is calculated which is sufficient to represent more
than 90% of modal mass participation in horizontal directions.
The modal mass participation in the vertical direction is just
below 90%. The vibration characteristics of the Karnali Bridge
could be categorized in three typical modes namely deck lateral
bending and torsion mode, vertical deck bending mode and
tower and pier dominated modes. Usually, the tower longitudinal
bending modes are coupled with the deck vertical bending
modes, and the tower lateral bending modes are coupled with
deck lateral bending and torsion modes. Deck modes are the
flexible modes with most of modes below the frequency of 1 Hz.
Pier and deck modes constitute major share of the mass of the
structure, the modal mass of the tower are relatively small.
5.3 Seismic Response Analysis
To identify the seismic response of the bridge system due to
horizontal and vertical motions, in the Phase I of the study, only
the horizontal component of the ground motion is applied. While
in Phase II all three component of the ground motions are applied

simultaneously. Finally, in Phase III vertical component of the

ground motions are adjusted such that peak of vertical motion
coincide with the peak longitudinal ground motion. In previous
study (Shrestha and Tuladhar, 2012) the damping of structure
was idealized by Rayleigh damping with effective viscous damping
of the overall system equal to 3% at the period of 0.1 sec and at
3.75 sec. However, in this study the effective damping of the
system is idealized to be 2% for all modes considered. Only linear
modal time-history analyses are carried out. Comparison of the
nonlinear time history analysis considering large displacement
geometric nonlinearity with the linear modal time-history analysis
of the bridge was presented in previous study (Shrestha and
Tuladhar, 2012), which validated the use of linear time-history
analysis.
5.4 Effect of Vertical Ground Motion
A series of linear modal time-history analyses are carried out
on the bridge to investigate the effect of vertical acceleration on
the behavior of the structure. The analyses are carried out for five
ground motions listed in Table 1.
5.4.1 Effect on Global Response
To identify the effect of vertical ground motion and coincidence
of peak vertical motion with the peak longitudinal motion, response
of the bridge system to the ground motion applied at three phases
are studied. Fig. 4 represents the vertical displacement at the mid
span of the bridge for JR Takatori with H representing the case of
horizontal ground motion only, H+V representing the case with
all three components applied and CON (H+V) representing the
case with peak vertical motion coinciding with the peak horizontal
(longitudinal) motion. Transverse displacement of the tower at
the top for the Gazli ground motion with H, H+V and CON
(H+V) are presented on the Fig. 5. Table 2 compares the vertical
deck displacement at mid span of main-span. Peak vertical dis-

Fig. 4. Mid-span Deck Displacement at Main Span for JR Takatori

Ground Motion

Fig. 5. Tower Transverse Displacement at Top for Gazli Ground

Motion

KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

Seismic Response of Long Span Cable-stayed Bridge to Near-fault Vertical Ground Motions

Table 2. Maximum and Minimum Displacement at Mid Span of

Main Span
Ground Motion
Max
H
Min
Sum
Max
H+V
Min
Sum
Max
CON
Min
(H+V)
Sum

Gazli Lomaprieta Landers Nishiakshi Takatori

0.18
0.38
0.09
0.17
0.56
-0.24
-0.39
-0.10
-0.16
-0.55
0.42
0.76
0.19
0.33
1.11
0.33
0.31
0.57
0.19
0.58
-0.51
-0.48
-0.77
-0.16
-0.51
0.83
0.78
1.34
0.34
1.09
0.36
0.58
0.58
0.18
0.60
-0.37
-0.48
-0.64
-0.18
-0.58
0.73
1.07
1.22
0.36
1.18

bridge. Axial force demand on cables and the tower, on which

response variation due to inclusion of vertical motion is significant,
are observed to find out the influence of vertical ground motion.
To quantify the effects of vertical ground motion on the response
of the cable-stayed bridge a parameter, Amplification Factor
(AF), is defined. AF could be defined as the ratio of axial load
(combined dead load and seismic loading) on cables and the
towers with and without vertical ground motion. For extreme
values of time history analyses (including the dead load prestressed loading) the amplification factor is defined as:
DL + RSPH + V
AF = --------------------------------------DL + RSP H

placement of the deck during three phases of the applied ground

motions are listed on the table. The term sum represents absolute
sum of the maximum and minimum responses to the ground
motion. The table reflects that the deck displacements at the mid
span, in general, will increases as the vertical component of the
ground motion is introduced. This increase could be very
dramatic for some ground motion (for example; Landers), while
for some ground motion displacement may also decrease very
slightly as in case of Takatori ground motion. Coincidence of
vertical peak motion with longitudinal peak motion does not
necessary increases the displacement of the deck. For some cases
it may result in increase of total maximum displacement whereas
in some cases it results in decrease depending upon the ground
motion characteristics.
5.4.2 Effect on Local Responses
The study also focuses on the effect of the vertical motion on
the local responses of cable and tower of the bridge system. It is
found that the effect of the vertical ground motion component on
the local responses of the cable stayed bridge is generally
confined to axial force demand on cable stays and tower of the

(2)

where, DL+ RSP (H+V) = Axial force (Max) for Case (H+V) +
dead load DL+RSP (H) = Axial force (Max) for Case (H) + dead
load
The case DL+ RSP (H+V) represents the Phase II and Phase
III of ground motion, the cases with all three components
together and the case of peak vertical motion coinciding with the
peak horizontal (longitudinal) motion, respectively.
Tables 3 and 4 present Amplification Factors (AF) for the
cables and tower of the bridge for combined horizontal and
vertical motion and coinciding peak vertical motion with peak
horizontal motion respectively for the selected cables and the
tower. The peak AF of 1.44 is observed for cable 20 for Landers
ground motion for combined vertical and horizontal ground
motion. The peak AF of 1.39 is also achieved for same cable for
the case of peak vertical motion coinciding with the peak
longitudinal motion.
Table 5 presents AF for shear, torsion and moment at the base
of the tower. It indicates that due to inclusion of vertical motion;
V3 (shear along longitudinal axis) and M2 (Moment about
transverse axis) are slightly affected. The negative values of AF

Table 3. AF for Combined Vertical and Horizontal Motion

Element
Ground motion
GAZLI(H+V)
LOMA(H+V)
LANDERS(H+V)
NAKASHI(H+V)
TAKATORI(H+V)
AVERAGE

Cable 1
Main span
1.02
1.02
1.02
0.99
0.99
1.01

Cable 3
Main span
1.09
1.00
1.17
0.99
1.00
1.05

Cable 7
Main span
1.19
0.99
1.41
1.00
0.96
1.11

Cable 15
Main span
1.07
1.02
1.36
1.04
1.12
1.12

Cable 20
Side span
1.11
0.96
1.44
1.04
1.02
1.11

Cable 23
Side span
1.09
0.99
1.24
1.01
0.98
1.06

Cable 26
Side span
1.14
0.96
1.26
1.01
0.98
1.07

Frame 878
Tower
1.06
1.13
1.19
0.98
1.01
1.07

Cable 26
Side span
1.12
1.03
1.27
1.00
1.03
1.09

Frame 878
Tower
1.00
1.04
1.18
0.99
1.02
1.05

Table 4. AF for Combined Vertical and Horizontal Motion with Peak Value Coinciding
Element
Ground motion
GAZLI(V+H)-CON
LOMA(V+H)-CON
LUCERNE(V+H)-CON
NAKASHI(H+V)-CON
TAKATORI(H+V)CON
AVERAGE
Vol. 00, No. 00 / 0000 0000

Cable 1
Main span
1.01
1.00
1.04
1.00
1.01
1.01

Cable 3
Main span
1.03
1.05
1.22
1.01
0.99
1.06

Cable 7
Main span
1.11
1.09
1.30
1.04
1.00
1.11
5

Cable 15
Main span
1.15
1.06
1.33
1.07
1.06
1.13

Cable 20
Side span
1.01
0.98
1.39
1.02
1.03
1.08

Cable 23
Side span
1.09
1.04
1.23
0.99
1.02
1.08

Bipin Shrestha

Table 5. AF for Internal Force Responses of Tower

Case Type

Type

Max
GAZLI(H+V)
Min
Max
GAZLICON
(H+V)
Min
Max
LOMA
(H+V)
Min
Max
LOMA CON
(H+V)
Min
Max
LANDERS
(H+V)
Min
Max
LANDERS CON
(H+V)
Min
Max
N-AKASHI
(H+V)
Min
Max
N-AKASHI CON
(H+V)
Min
Max
TAKATORI
(H+V)
Min
TAKATORI CON Max
(H+V)
Min

Shear
V2
1.00
-1.00
1.00
-1.00
1.03
-1.00
1.00
-1.00
1.00
-1.00
0.99
-0.99
1.00
-1.00
1.00
-1.00
1.00
-1.00
1.00
-1.00

Table 6. Cable Breaking Strength and Maximum Tension for Case

(H+V)

Shear Torsion Moment Moment

V3
T
M2
M3
1.03
0.96
1.11
1.00
-1.04 -0.99
-1.11
-1.00
0.96
1.01
0.97
1.00
-1.01 -0.99
-1.07
-1.00
0.96
0.99
0.94
1.00
-0.98 -0.97
-0.93
-1.00
1.00
1.05
1.00
1.01
-1.00 -0.99
-1.00
-1.00
1.01
1.02
1.08
1.01
-0.99 -1.21
-0.93
-1.01
1.00
1.08
0.97
1.00
-1.01 -0.93
-1.04
-0.99
1.00
0.99
0.99
1.00
-1.01 -1.00
-0.98
-1.00
0.99
1.00
0.98
1.00
-0.98 -1.00
-0.96
-1.00
1.00
1.00
0.99
1.00
-1.01 -1.00
-1.01
-1.00
1.03
1.00
1.02
1.00
-1.00 -1.00
-1.01
-1.00

Element
Cable 1
Cable 3
Cable 7
Cable 15
Cable 20
Cable 23
Cable 26

Factor
Dead Max Tension Max
Ground Breaking
of
final
(Seismic
Load
motion Strength
Safety
loading) Tension
Tension
Kn
Kn
Kn
Kn
3775
958
4733 Takatori 9409.5 1.99
2248
663
2911
Gazli
6292.5 2.16
1554
959
2513 Landers 4906.5 1.95
1007
1044
2051 Takatori 3175.5 1.55
1206
1263
2469 Takatori 3520.5 1.43
1969
670
2639 Takatori 4906.5 1.86
1902
582
2484
Gazli
6292.5 2.53

Table 7. Cable Breaking Strength and Maximum Tension for Case

CON (H+V)
Element
Cable 1
Cable 3
Cable 7
Cable 15
Cable 20
Cable 23
Cable 26

are used to present amplification of negative values of shear,

moment and torsion.

6. Structural Performance
The investigation further extends to examine the structural
performance of the bridge to the applied suite of ground motions.
Primary focus is invested on the responses of cables and the
tower of the cable stayed bridge on which more adverse effect is
observed due to inclusion the vertical ground motion. Table 6
presents the allowable breaking strength of the cables, based on
the design drawings and the maximum tensions on the cables
due to the seismic motions including the vertical ground motion.
Table 7 presents the performance of cables for the ground
motions for the case CON (H+V). Tables 6 and 7 collectively
indicate that coincidence of peak vertical motion with peak
longitudinal motion does not have the adverse effect as presumed initially. It has only slight effect on the maximum tension
of the cables. It does not necessarily result on higher tensile
forces; it may also result in reduction of tension forces.
The study further investigates to find out whether the tower of
the Karnali Bridge is capable of resisting the load within the
elastic regime. The Karnali Bridge, being a critical lifeline facility
and integral part of East-West national highway systems, ideally
should resist even the major event of seismic loading within the
elastic range. To evaluate the elastic capacity of tower yield
surface equation for doubly symmetrical steel section developed
by Duan and Chen (1990) is used. The equation considers the
tower base as a thin walled box section. Figs. 6(a) and 6(b)
present the preliminary analysis of the tower for JR Takatori

Dead Max Tension Max

Ground
final
(Seismic
Load
motion
Tension loading) Tension
Kn
Kn
Kn
3775
1045
4820
Takatori
2248
651
2899
Landers
1554
931
2485 Loma prieta
1007
929
1936
Takatori
1206
1270
2476
Takatori
1969
762
2731
Takatori
1902
660
2562
Gazli

Breaking
Strength
Kn
9409.5
6292.5
4906.5
3175.5
3520.5
4906.5
6292.5

Factor
of
Safety
1.95
2.17
1.97
1.64
1.42
1.80
2.46

ground motion that resulted in the most adverse responses

amongst the selected ground motions. In preliminary analysis
conservative design combination of maximum axial load with
maximum bending on both axes of the tower is considered. Even
though this scenario of maximum value on all the axes are
unlikely to occur, it is used to generate a preliminary understanding on the status of the tower and the need of further refined
analysis. Figs. 6(a) and 6(b) show the conservative biaxial plot
for H+V and CON (H+V) condition to Takatori ground motion.
The biaxial plot is a spatial (3D) diagram hence it is difficult to
illustrate the interaction condition in two dimension. An alternative horizontal slice of the biaxial diagram at the level of the

Fig. 6. Critical Quarter Orbit Plot of Tower Base for H+V and CON
(H+V) for Takatori Ground Motion

KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

Seismic Response of Long Span Cable-stayed Bridge to Near-fault Vertical Ground Motions

applied axial force is used, plotting the contour of the diagram at

the level to create a Quarter-Orbit plot. Only a quarter of the
orbit plot is presented since the orbit will be symmetrical for
symmetrical sections. Fig. 6(a) corresponds to peak axial force of
77059 kN with peak moment demand of 147476 kNm and
111322 kNm respectively for M22 (moment about bridge
longitudinal axis) and M33 (moment about bridge transverse
axis). In a typical design situation a section is deemed to be
unyielding if the coordinate (Abs (M22) and Abs (M33)) resides
inside the yield envelop in the quarter-orbit.
The result obtained from preliminary analysis indicate the
tower base is capable of resisting the conservative combination
of JR Takatori ground motion (H+V) and CON (H+V) within the
elastic range hence no plastic deformation and damage will be
there in this condition. It also highlights the fact that further
analysis is not required since yielding does not occurred for the
conservative of the estimate. Thus linear elastic stress-strain
relationship used in this study is valid for given sets of ground
motion.

7. Conclusions
This study presents the seismic response of a long span cable
stayed bridge subjected to near field strong ground motions. The
influence of vertical components of ground motion on structural
response of flexible bridge system is analyzed. Based on the
result and discussion presented, following conclusions are made:
1. Vertical ground motions found to have insignificant effect
on the lateral response of the bridge. However, vertical displacement of the bridge deck at mid span is found to be sensitive to vertical ground motion. The sensitivity, however,
could be slight to significant depending upon ground motion
characteristics. Coincidence of the peak vertical motion with
the longitudinal motion does not necessary result on higher
total deck displacement.
2. Vertical ground motion primarily affects the axial force
demand on the cable and tower of the bridge. The coincidence of peak vertical motion with peak longitudinal motion
has little impact on the average AF for axial response of
cable and tower of the bridge. Variation of average AF for
both H+V and CON (H+V) is slight without any definitive
pattern. Inclusion of vertical motion also affects the shear
force along the longitudinal axis and moment about the
transverse axis on the tower of the bridge. However, coincidence of the peak motions results in limited effect on the
response of the tower.
3. Cables and the tower of the Karnali Bridge performed well
under both H+V and CON (H+V) cases of the selected five
ground motion. Tower of the bridge is found capable of
resisting the loads within the elastic regime thus validating
the linear elastic material property used in this study.
4. The result presented show that ground motions with the
highest PGA at vertical direction value do not necessarily
induce the maximum relative response. Amplification of
Vol. 00, No. 00 / 0000 0000

response of the bridge could not be correlated with the ratio

of PGA value (V/H). Amplification depends upon ground
motion characteristics other than PGA value. However, due
to the limited numbers of ground motion considered,
ground motion characteristics influencing the amplification
could not be identified reliably, hence not presented in the
paper.

Acknowledgements
The author wishes to acknowledge the contribution of Dr.
Roshan Tuladhar, Dr. Jagat Kumar Shrestha and Prof. Prem Nath
Maskey of Tribhuvan University, where this research was initiated.
The author is thankful to Winthrop Prof. Hong Hao, The University of Western Australia, for his support and inspiration. The
author also acknowledges the reviewers for their constructive
comments.

References
Button, M. R., Cronin, C. J., and Mayes, R. L. (2002). Effect of vertical
motions on seismic response of bridges. ASCE Journal of
Structural Engineering, Vol. 128, No. 12, pp. 1551-1564.
Chen, W. F. and Duan, L. (1990) A yield surface equation for doubly
symmetrical section. Structural Engineering, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp.
114-119.
Collier, C. J. and Elnashai, A. S. (2001). A procedure for combining
vertical and horizontal seismic action effects. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 521-539.
Kalkan, E. and Graizer, V. (2007). Multi component ground motion
response spectra for coupled horizontal, vertical, angular acceleration and tilt. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology, Paper No.
485, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 259-284.
Kim, S. J., Holub, C., and Elnashai, A. S. (2011). Analytical assessment
of the effect of vertical earthquake motion on RC bridge piers.
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 137, No. 2, pp. 252260
Kunnath, S., Abramson, N., Chai, Y. H., Erduran, E., and Yilmaz, Z.
(2008). Development of guidelines for incorporation of vertical
ground motion effects in seismic design of highway bridge,
Technical Report CA/UCD-SESM-08-01, University of California
at Davis.
Kunnath, S. K., Erduran, E., Chai, Y. H., and Yashinsky, M. (2007).
Near-fault vertical ground motions on seismic response of highway
overcrossings. Journal of Bridge Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 13, No.
3, pp. 282-290.
Li, X., Dou, H., and Zhu, X. (2007). Engineering characteristics of
near-fault vertical ground motions and their effect on the seismic
response of bridges. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering
Vibration, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 345-350.
Nazmy, A. S. and Abdel Ghaffar, A. M. (1991). Three dimensional
nonlinear seismic behavior of cable-stayed bridges. Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 117, No 11, pp. 3456-3476.
Newmark, N. M., Blume, J. A., and Kapur, K. K. (1973). Seismic
design spectra for nuclear power plants. Journal of the Power
Division, Proceedings of ASCE, Vol. 99, No. 2, pp. 287-303.
Papazoglou, A. J. and Elnashai, A. S. (1996). Analytical and field
evidence of damaging effects of vertical earthquake ground motion.

Bipin Shrestha

Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 25, No. 10, pp. 1109-1137.

Ren,W. X. and Obata, M. (1999). Elastic plastic seismic behavior of
long-span cable-stayed bridges. Journal of Bridge Engineering,
ASCE, Vol. 4, No.3, pp. 194-203
Saadeghvaziri, M. A. and Foutch, D. A. (1991). Dynamic behavior of
R/C highway bridges under the combined effect of vertical and
horizontal earthquake motions. Earthquake Engineering and

Structural Dynamics, Vol. 20, pp. 535-549.

Shrestha, B. and Tuladhar, R. (2012), Response of Karnali Bridge,
Nepal to near fault earthquakes. Proceedings of ICE- Bridge
Engineering, ICE, Vol. 165, No. 4, pp. 223-232.
Valdebenito G. E. and Aparicio, A. C. (2006), Seismic behavior of
cable-stayed bridges: The state of the art review. 4th International
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Taiwan, paper No. 45.

KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering