Skip to main content
Log in

Seismic fragility analysis of transmission towers considering effects of soil-structure interaction and depth-varying ground motion inputs

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Transmission towers are critical components of electrical transmission systems, whose damage and failure during earthquakes may cause extensive economic losses and significantly hinder the post-seismic rehabilitation. Seismic fragility analyses of pile-supported transmission towers are usually performed without regard for the influences of soil-structure interaction (SSI) and the site amplification of ground motions from the pile end to ground surface, which may lead to inaccurate structural performance evaluation results. In this context, the present study numerically investigates the seismic fragility of a typical pile-supported transmission tower considering SSI and depth-varying ground motion (DVGM) inputs. Specifically, a three-dimensional finite element model of the transmission tower is created in ABAQUS software, and SSI is simulated by adopting soil springs at the end of pile nodes. The three-dimensional DVGMs are stochastically synthesized to be used as seismic inputs. Moreover, the pushover analysis is employed to identify the threshold values of different limit states of the transmission tower. Then, probabilistic seismic demand models (PSDMs) are developed by nonlinear time history analyses and linear regression fitting, which are used to generate fragility curves. Furthermore, parameter studies are carried out to discuss the effects of SSI, DVGMs and structural parameter uncertainties on the seismic fragilities. Numerical results show that the seismic fragilities of the transmission tower can be affected substantially by the above mentioned three influencing factors. This research is expected to serve as an exploration to reliably and effectively evaluate the seismic fragility of a transmission tower with SSI.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ABAQUS Inc. (2014) ABAQUS/Analysis user’s manual-version 6.14. Providence, RI, USA

  • Alembagheri M, Seyedkazemi M (2015) Seismic performance sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of gravitydams. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 44(1):41–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Petroleum Institute (API) (1993) Recommended practice for planning, design and constructing fixed offshore platforms. In: API RP 2A-WSD 20th Edn, American Petroleum Institute

  • Asgarian B, Eslamlou SD, Zaghi AE, Mehr M (2016) Progressive collapse analysis of power transmission towers. J Constr Steel Res 123:31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.04.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashour M, Norris G, Pilling P (1998) Lateral loading of a pile in layered soil using the strain wedge model. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 124(4):303–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billah AHMM, Alam MS, Bhuiyan MAR (2013) Fragility analysis of retrofitted multicolumn bridge bent subjected to near-fault and far-field ground motion. J Bridge Eng 18(10):992–1004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bisoi S, Haldar S (2014) Dynamic analysis of offshore wind turbine in clay considering soil-monopile-tower interaction. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 63:19–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunesi E, Nascimbene R, Parisi F, Augenti N (2015) Progressive collapse fragility of reinforced concrete framed structures through incremental dynamic analysis. Eng Struct 104:65–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavalieri F, Correia AA, Crowley H, Pinho R (2020) Seismic fragility analysis of URM buildings founded on piles: influence of dynamic soil-structure interaction models. Bull Earthq Eng 18:4127–4156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00853-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornell CA, Jalayer F, Hamburger RO, Foutch DA (2002) Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC federal emergency management agency steel moment frame guidelines. J Struct Eng 128(4):526–533. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2002)128:4(526)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dash SR, Rouholamin M, Lombardi D, Bhattacharya S (2017) A practical method for construction of p-y curves for liquefiable soils. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 97:478–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Det Norske Veritas (DNV) (2014) DNV-OS-J101: Design of offshore wind turbine structures. Copenhagen, Denmark: DNV

  • Der Kiureghian A (1980) Structural response to stationary excitation. J Eng Mech Div 106:1195–1213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolsek M (2009) Incremental dynamic analysis with consideration of modeling uncertainties. Earthq Eng Struct D 38:805–825. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutta SC, Bhattacharya K, Roy R (2004) Response of low-rise buildings under seismic ground excitation incorporating soil-structure interaction. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 24:893–914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2004.07.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elgamal A, Yan LJ, Yang ZH, Conte JP (2008) Three-dimensional seismic response of Humboldt Bay bridge-foundation-ground system. J Struct Eng 134(7):1165–1176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fardis MN, Papailia A, Tsionis G (2012) Seismic fragility of RC framed and wall-frame buildings designed to the EN-Eurocodes. Bull Earthq Eng 10(6):1767–1793. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-012-9379-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FEMA-302 (1997) NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Washington, DC, USA

  • FEMA-695 (2009) Quantification of building seismic performance factors. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Washington, DC, USA

  • Gardoni P, Mosalam KM, Kiureghian AD (2003) Probabilistic seismic demand models and fragility estimates for RC bridges. J Struct Eng 7(1):79–106

    Google Scholar 

  • GB 18306-2015 (2015) Seismic ground motion parameters zonation map of china. Standardization Administration of China Press, Beijing, China. (in Chinese)

  • GB 50017-2017 (2017), Code for design of steel structure, China Architecture & Building Press; Beijing, China. (in Chinese)

  • GB 50010-2002 (2002), Code for design of concrete structures, China Architecture & Building Press; Beijing, China. (in Chinese)

  • GB 50665-2011 (2011). Code for design of 1000kV Overhead transmission line. China architecture and building press, Beijing, China. (in Chinese)

  • Goel RK, Chopra AK (1997) Evaluation of bridge abutment capacity and stiffness during earthquakes. Earthq Spectra 13(1):1–23. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585929

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo X, Wu YK, Guo Y (2016) Time-dependent seismic fragility analysis of bridge systems under scour hazard and earthquake loads. Eng Struct 121:52–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.04.038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • JCSS (Joint Committee on Structural Safety) (2001) Probabilistic Model Code-part 3-Material Properties

  • Ji J, Elnashai AS, Kuchma DA (2007) An analytical framework for seismic fragility analysis of RC high-rise buildings. Eng Struct 29(12):3197–3209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.08.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang WQ, Wang ZQ, Mcclure G, Wang GL, Geng JD (2011) Accurate modeling of joint effects in lattice transmission towers. Eng Struct 33(5):1817–1827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.02.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinali K, Ellingwood BR (2007) Seismic fragility assessment of steel frames for consequence-based engineering: a case study for Memphis, TN. Eng Struct 29(6):1115–1127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kircher CA, Nassar AA, Kustu O, Holmes W (1997) Development of building damage functions for earthquake loss estimation. Earthq Spectra 13(4):663–682. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585974

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotsubo S, Takanishi T, Uno K, Sonoda T (1985) Dynamic tests and seismic analysis of high towers of electrical transmission line. Trans Japan Soc Civ Eng 15:72–75. https://doi.org/10.2208/jscej1969.1983.333_59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krawinkler H, Seneviratna GDPK (1998) Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation. Eng Struct 20:452–464. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(97)00092-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon O, Elnashai AS (2006) The effect of material and ground motion uncertainty on the seismic vulnerability curves of RC structure. Eng Struct 28(2):289–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Li HN, Hao H, Bi KM, Chen BK (2018a) Seismic fragility analyses of sea-crossing cable-stayed bridges subjected to multi-support ground motions on offshore sites. Eng Struct 165:441–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.03.066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Hao H, Li HN, Bi KM (2015) Theoretical modeling and numerical simulation of seismic motions at seafloor. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 77:220–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.05.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Li HN, Hao H, Bi KM, Tian L (2018b) Simulation of multi-support depth-varying earthquake ground motions within heterogeneous onshore and offshore sites. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 17(3):475–490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-018-0456-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luco N, Cornell CA (2007) Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions. Earthq Spectra 23(2):357–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makris N, Badoni D, Delis E, Gazetas G (1994) Prediction of observed bridge response with soil-pile-structure interaction. J Struct Eng 120(10):2992–3011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansouri I, Amiri GG, Hu JW, Khoshkalam M, Soori S, Shahbazi S (2017) Seismic fragility estimates of LRB base isolated frames using performance-based design. Shock Vib. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/5184790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mylonakis G, Gazetas G (2000) Seismic soil-structure interaction: Beneficial or detrimental? J Earthq Eng 4(3):277–301. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363246900000175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan HY, Tian L, Fu X, Li HN (2020) Sensitivities of the seismic response and fragility estimate of a transmission tower to structural and ground motion uncertainties. J Constr Steel Res 167:105941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2020.105941

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pang YT, Wu X, Shen GY, Yuan WC (2014) Seismic fragility analysis of cable-stayed bridges considering different sources of uncertainties. J Bridge Eng 19(4):04013015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parisi F, Sabella G (2016) Flow-type landslide fragility of reinforced concrete framed buildings. Eng Struct 131:28–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pejovic J, Jankovic S (2016) Seismic fragility assessment for reinforced concrete high-rise buildings in Southern Euro-Mediterranean zone. Bull Earthq Eng 14(1):185–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9812-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitilakis KD, Karapetrou ST, Fotopoulou SD (2014) Consideration of aging and SSI effects on seismic vulnerability assessment of RC buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 12(4):1755–1776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter K (2021) A beginner’s guide to fragility, vulnerability, and risk. In: Beer M, Kougioumtzoglou I, Patelli E, Au IK (eds) Encyclopedia of earthquake engineering. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Raffaele DR, Bhattacharya S, Goda K (2018) Seismic performance assessment of monopile-supported offshore wind turbines using unscaled natural earthquake records. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 109:154–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.03.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramamoorthy SK, Gardoni P, Bracci JM (2006) Probabilistic demand models and fragility curves for reinforced concrete frames. J Struc Eng 132(10):1563–1572. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2006)132:10(1563)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saez E, Lopezcaballero F, Modaressifarahmandrazavi A (2011) Effect of the inelastic dynamic soil-structure interaction on the seismic vulnerability assessment. Struct Saf 33(1):51–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shirzadi M, Behnamfar F, Asadi P (2020) Effects of soil–structure interaction on inelastic response of torsionally-coupled structures. Bull Earthq Eng 18(4):1213–1243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi YJ, Wang M, Wang YQ (2011) Experimental and constitutive model study of structural steel under cyclic loading. J Constr Steel Res 67(8):1185–1197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2011.02.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefanidou SP, Sextos AG, Kotsoglou AN, Lesgidis N, Kappos AJ (2017) Soil-structure interaction effects in analysis of seismic fragility of bridges using an intensity-based ground motion selection procedure. Eng Struct 151:366–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Su L, Wan HP, Bi KM, Li Y, Lu JC, Ling XZ, Elgamal A, Arulmoli AK (2019) Seismic fragility analysis of pile-supported wharves with the influence of soil permeability. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 122:211–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabatabaiefar HR, Massumi A (2010) A simplified method to determine seismic responses of reinforced concrete moment resisting building frames under influence of soil-structure interaction. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 30(11):1259–1267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.05.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tubaldi E, Barbato M, Dall’ Asta A, (2012) Influence of model parameter uncertainty on seismic transverse response and vulnerability of continuous steel-concrete composite bridges with dual loadpath. J Struct Eng 138(3):363–374. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian L, Dong X, Pan HY, He XY (2019a) The critical angle of seismic incidence of transmission tower-line system based on wavelet energy method. Earthq Struct 17(4):387–398

    Google Scholar 

  • Tian L, Gai X, Qu B (2017) Shake table tests of steel towers supporting extremely long-span electricity transmission lines under spatially correlated ground motions. Eng Struct 132:791–807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.11.068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian L, Ma RS, Qu B (2018) Influence of different criteria for selecting ground motions compatible with IEEE 693 required response spectrum on seismic performance assessment of electricity transmission towers. Eng Struct 156:337–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.11.046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian L, Pan HY, Ma RS (2019b) Probabilistic seismic demand model and fragility analysis of transmission tower subjected to near-field ground motions. J Constr Steel Res 156:266–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2019.02.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian L, Pan HY, Ma RS, Zhang LJ, Liu ZW (2019c) Full-scale test and numerical failure analysis of a latticed steel tubular transmission tower. Eng Struct 208:109919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vamvatsikos D, Fragiadakis M (2010) Incremental dynamic analysis for estimating seismic performance sensitivity and uncertainty. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 39(2):1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Val D, Bljuger F, Yankelevsky D (1997) Reliability evaluation in nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete structures. Struct Saf 19(2):203–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veletsos AS, Meek JW (1974) Dynamic behaviour of building-foundation systems. Earthq Eng Struct D 3:121–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290030203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang C, Feng KR, Zhang H, Li QW (2019) Seismic performance assessment of electric power systems subjected to spatially correlated earthquake excitations. Struct Intratruct E 15(3):351–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2018.1547766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang JT, Zhang MX, Jin AY, Zhang CH (2018) Seismic fragility of arch dams based on damage analysis. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 109:58–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.01.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang SM, Kutter BL, Chacko MJ, Wilson DW, Boulanger RW, Abghari A (1998) Nonlinear seismic soil-pile structure interaction. Earthq Spectra 14(2):377–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf JP (1985) Dynamic soil-structure interaction. Prentice Hall Inc, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu G, Zhai CH, Li S, Xie LL (2014) Effects of near-fault ground motions and equivalent pulses on Large Crossing Transmission Tower-line System. Eng Struct 77:161–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xie LY, Tang J, Tang HS, Xie Q, Xue ST (2012) Seismic fragility assessment of transmission towers via performance-based analysis. In: Proceedings, 15th world conference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon, Portugal

  • Yang J, Sato T (2000) Interpretation of seismic vertical amplification observed at an array site. B Seismol Soc Am 90(2):275–285. https://doi.org/10.1785/0119990068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zentner I (2017) A general framework for the estimation of analytical fragility functions based on multivariate probability distributions. Struct Saf 64:54–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang P, Song GB, Li HN, Lin YX (2013) Seismic control of power transmission tower using pounding TMD. J Eng Mech 139(10):1395–1406. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao B, Taucer F (2010) Performance of infrastructure during the May 12, 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China. J Earthq Eng 14(4):578–600. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460903274053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng HD, Fan J, Long XH (2017) Analysis of the seismic collapse of a high-rise power transmission tower structure. J Constr Steel Res 134:180–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.03.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuo HR, Bi KM, Hao H, Li C (2019) Influence of earthquake ground motion modelling on the dynamic responses of offshore wind turbines. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 121:151–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (under Awards No. 51778347, No. 51578325 and No. 51808099) and the Young Scholars Program of Shandong University (under Award No. 2017WLJH33). The second author also acknowledges the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. DUT20RC(3)005).

Funding

This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51778347, No. 51578325 and No. 51808099); Young Scholars Program of Shandong University (No. 2017WLJH33); and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. DUT20RC(3)005).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Formal analysis and investigation, Writing-original draft preparation: Haiyang Pan; Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing-Reviewing and Editing: Chao Li; Supervision, Writing-Reviewing and Editing: Li Tian;

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chao Li.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pan, H., Li, C. & Tian, L. Seismic fragility analysis of transmission towers considering effects of soil-structure interaction and depth-varying ground motion inputs. Bull Earthquake Eng 19, 4311–4337 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01124-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01124-x

Keywords

Navigation