<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Proceedings of the Third PRC-US Workshop on Seismic Analysis and Design of Special Bridges</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773021</link>
      <description><![CDATA[These are the Proceedings of the Third PRC-US Workshop on Seismic Analysis and Design of Special Bridges, which took place October 21-22, 2004 in Shanghai, China.  It was collaboratively arranged by the Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER) and the State Key Laboratory for Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering at the Tongji University in Shanghai, China. The workshop themes include seismic design and retrofit of long span bridges, small to medium span bridges with complex geometry and those bridges located on a particularly hazardous site.  Seismic risk assessment, performance based design, and seismic safety evaluation are also covered.  This volume contains 20 papers addressing a wide range of these research fields. The workshop agenda and a list of participants are also included.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773021</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Development of Double Spherical Seismic Isolation Bearing</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773164</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The actual state of China's seismic design of continuous girder bridges is discussed and seismic isolation design principle is recommended for this kind of bridge.  The configuration and working mechanism of the double spherical seismic isolation bearing developed recently is introduced briefly.  The test results of the bearing are introduced in detail and it's shown that this kind of bearing is suitable for the seismic design of continuous girder bridges.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773164</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Buckling Restrained Braces for Ductile End Cross Frames in Steel Girder Bridges</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773159</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Buckling restrained braces (BRBs) have been shown to be a cost-effective way of improving the seismic performance of moment-frame buildings.  In this paper the application of these devices to bridge structures is explored and in particular BRBs are investigated as ductile members of the end cross frames in steel place girder bridges.  Component experiments on a series of braces are first described and it is shown that they exhibit good cyclic behavior, although loading history and strain rate affect their performance and ultimate limit state.  System experiments on a 0.4 scale model of a two-girder bridge using a pair of shake tables at the University of Nevada Reno are next described.  BRBs are used in the ductile end cross-frames of this model and the results show a significant reduction in the shear demand in the bridge.  Furthermore, the cross-sectional drift in the superstructures is less than when angle X-braces are used in the end frames.  Ductile end cross frames are thus shown to be an effective means of improving the seismic performance of steel girder bridges and believed to be most effective when both the superstructure and substructure are relatively rigid.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773159</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A Seismic Measure for Three-span Cable-stayed Bridge in Longitudinal Direction</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773088</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In this paper, the seismic responses of a cable-stayed bridge with different longitudinal restraint at the tower-girder connections are investigated.  The results show that supplement of an elastic restraint or a fluid damper is useful measure to reduce structural response.  Besides, a method which is used to estimate design parameters of longitudinal elastic restraint or fluid damper is presented, and the corresponding ranges of these parameters are suggested.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773088</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FHWA Guidance Document for Seismic Performance Testing of Bridge Piers</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773083</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In order to provide assistance to seismic performance investigators in efficiently producing or obtaining consistent and reliable experimental testing results, Federal Highway Administration developed the "Recommendations for Seismic Performance Testing of Bridge Piers," which contains information on preparation, execution, and documentation of pier seismic performance testing.  This document is purported for use in both academic research and engineering validations.  It provides elaborate description on an assembly of available testing procedures while alternatives are offered.  In addition to conventional piers made of reinforced concrete, steel, and wood, piers made of advanced material can be tested using the listed methods.  Basic requirements on testing record are given, so to allow researchers or engineers to access and verify the testing results in a later time.  Assistance from experienced experimental experts and bridge engineers were requested during the development of the document.  An expert panel including members from academia, state highway agencies, and federal government, was assembled to advise the progress and review the product.  At the time of completion of this paper, the FHWA guidance document is at its final stage of technical revision and will be published in a short time.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773083</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Construction Materials and Methods for Building Seismic Resistant Bridges and Structures</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773022</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Major earthquakes around the world result in increased public awareness of the potential damage and disruption to the transportation systems.  The bridge engineering community has learned and relearned many lessons from these earthquakes for developing improved earthquake design criteria, analysis tools, structural details and connections, building materials and construction practices.  Extensive research and studies have been done to improve the seismic performance of new and existing bridges and structures.  The main objective of this paper is to discuss the importance of selecting the proper materials, such as, high performance concrete, high performance steels and reinforced concrete polymers, and applying good construction practices in building seismic resistant bridges and structures.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773022</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Recent Studies on Fragility Information on Highway Bridges</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773025</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Recent studies on fragility information on highway bridges are presented, highlighting statistical procedures for empirical curve development.  Maximum likelihood is used for estimation of fragility parameters and statistical confidence of these parameters by means of analytical simulation.  The confidence interval is quantitatively demonstrated to become narrower as the sample size of bridges at each damage level of interest increases.  Dependence of the fragility curves on different bridge characteristics such as skew angle, number of spans, and soil conditions are demonstrated using empirical fragility curves.  The empirical fragility curves are used to calibrate the parameters in the analytical fragility models such as the effect of retrofit and threshold values of ductility factors that define the state of damage.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773025</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A Brief Introduction to the New Code for Seismic Design of Railway Engineering</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773074</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In China, the seismic design of railway bridges is included in the code for seismic design of railway engineering.  In recent years, the code for seismic design of railway engineering has been revised to adapt to the new trends for railway engineering.  Some problems in the new code were presented and discussed in this paper.  Furthermore, some practical examples about seismic design for railway bridges are introduced in this paper.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773074</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A Comparison of Minimum Confinement in European and American Codes for Circular RC Bridge Columns</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773069</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The maximum response modification factor (e.g. force reduction factor) in the range of 3 to 4 for ductile bending columns are used in Eurocode 8, AASHTO, ATC-32 and Caltrans BDS.  Correspondingly, the displacement ductility capacity of structures should be more than 4, and the curvature ductility of structures should be more than 13.  Attained curvature ductility levels of columns with the minimum confining reinforcement in the four documents are evaluated taking account of longitudinal reinforcement ratio and axial force ratio.  It is shown that, the requirement of ATC-32 can assure expected ductility levels of columns.  The minimum confining reinforcement specified in Caltrans BDS is not enough.  The requirements of Eurocode 8 and AASHTO are relatively conservative for columns with low longitudinal reinforcement ratio and low axial force ratio, but deficient for columns with high longitudinal reinforcement ratio and high axial force ratio.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773069</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Responses of Long-span Structures Subjected to Multiple Random Ground Excitations</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773082</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Long span bridges are usually important public facilities and so much attention has been given to evaluating their safety during earthquakes.  The wave-passage effect caused by the different times at which seismic waves arrive at different supports must be taken into account during their design.  The random vibration approach is based on a statistical characterization of the set of motions at the supports.  For a long time it has been widely regarded as a good alternative for dealing with the above spatially varying input motions, but finding suitable computational methods has proved to be a difficult problem.  This problem is largely overcome by the recently developed Pseudo Excitation Method (PEM), which is a highly efficient and accurate algorithm series.  It is accurate because the correlation terms between all participating modes and between all excitations have both been included.  It is also easy to use because the stationary random vibration analysis is transformed into a harmonic vibration analysis.  Such deterministic computations are very convenient and numerical comparisons given in this paper also show the good applicability of this PEM random vibration method in dealing with the spatial effects.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773082</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Protective Measures in the Seismic Design and Retrofit of Long-Span Bridges</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773075</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The use of protective measures in the seismic retrofit and/or design of six major U.S. bridges is described.  The protective measures include the use of dampers for energy absorption and control of displacement; the use of isolation bearings for energy absorption and force-reduction; the use of ductile links for the control and localization of damage; and the use of stiffeners to prevent buckling and enhance ductility.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773075</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Structural Seismic Analysis of Nanning Bridge</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773161</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Nanning Bridge has its own particularity in seismic analysis.  In order to improve the seismic performance of the vulnerable parts of the Bridge, initial research of the Bridge's seismic response was carried out for this project, and for three design methods of expansion joints, different seismic response of the bridge's main span were discussed in this article.  It's the conclusion that two additional expansion joints should be set up between the main bridge and the approach bridge so as to separate the seismic response of main bridge from that of the approach bridge in longitudinal direction, and finally reduce the longitudinal seismic response of the main bridge.  This conclusion can be referred in the following design of the Bridge.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773161</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Proof-of-Concept Testing of a Laterally Stable Eccentrically Braced Frame for Steel Bridge Piers</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773067</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Eccentrically braced frames have been shown to exhibit excellent seismic performance.  However, eccentrically braced frames have had limited use in the steel piers of bridges due to the difficulty to provide the lateral bracing required to prevent possibility of lateral torsional buckling of the link.  An eccentrically braced frame system in which lateral bracing of the link can be avoided, would make it desirable in the context of bridge seismic design and retrofit. This paper describes the design and testing of a proof-of-concept eccentrically braced frame specimen that utilizes a hybrid rectangular shear link that is not laterally braced.  Equations used for design, including plastic moment, stiffener spacing, and limiting flange compactness ratio, are given and references for their derivations are provided.  The quasi-static cyclic proof-of-concept testing is described and results are reported.  Stable and full hysteretic loops were obtained and no signs of flange, web, or lateral torsional buckling were observed.  The link was subjected to 0.15 radians of rotation in the final cycle, which is almost twice the maximum rotation allowed in building codes for links with I-shaped cross-sections.  Although the final failure mode was fracture of the bottom link flange, the large rotations achieved were well above what would be required in a seismic event, indicating that hybrid rectangular links without lateral bracing of the link can indeed be a viable alternative for applications in steel bridge piers in seismic regions.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773067</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Tappan Zee Bridge Seismic Assessment</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773071</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Tappan Zee Bridge is a 4.9 km (3 miles) long, 50-year old bridge that spans the Hudson River between the towns of Nyack and Tarrytown, north of New York City.  The bridge is the "Flag Ship" of the New York State Thruway (NYSTA) system.  The bridge carries seven lanes of traffic and is a critical link in the New York City area transportation system.  The subsurface geology of the Hudson River at the Tappan Zee Bridge site is unique.  A considerable thickness of soil overlies the bedrock.  The typical sequence of strata from the top consists of organic silt, silty clay, sand, silty clay, varved clay, glacial till and rock.  The bridge foundations are supported on different subsurface conditions.  The 2.4 km (1.5 miles) long western half of the bridge consists of 165 low level trestle spans, each 15.2 m (50 ft) long, supported on 24.4 m (80 ft) long timber piles in the organic clay and silty clay.  The top of rock is as deep as 213.4 m (700 ft) below the riverbed in this area.  To the east of the trestle spans, 76.2 m (250 ft) long deck truss spans flank the main navigational crossing.  Most of these spans are founded on cofferdam foundations supported on piles supported on rock.  The navigational main span structure is supported on four piers that are supported on partially buoyant pile support caissons.  The caissons support approximately 70% of the dead load of the structure by buoyancy.  Moderate earthquakes have occurred in New York historically and some seismic hazard does exist.  According to the United States Geological Survey, on August 10, 1884, an estimated magnitude 5.2 event hit New York City.  An earlier magnitude 5.2 earthquake had occurred on December 18, 1737.  The unique Hudson River subsurface geology at the Tappan Zee Bridge site made the need for seismic assessment imperative.  In 1994, NYSTA initiated seismic risk assessment of the Tappan Zee Bridge.  The intent of the study was to establish seismic characteristics of the existing bridge.  Site specific seismicity criteria were developed for this study.  As a result of this study, certain initial assessments regarding the seismic vulnerability and the need for seismic retrofit in various segments of the bridge were determined.  This study was completed in 1995.  In 2001, the NYSTA initiated the Tappan Zee Bridge/I-287 Corridor Study, which included an independent investigation of seismic risk assessment and retrofit scenarios.  New York City Seismic Hazard Guidelines published in 1998 were used for this study.  This study was completed in 2004.  The paper presents a qualitative comparison of the two studies and the varying degrees of seismic retrofit recommendations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773071</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Inelastic Response and Damage Analysis of High-rise Bridge Pier under Pulse-type Near-fault Ground Motions</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/773024</link>
      <description><![CDATA[According to the engineering example of 8# bridge pier of Huatupo bridge, the inelastic response demands and seismic damage performance evaluation of reinforced concrete high-rise bridge pier under pulse-type near-fault ground motions and responding equivalent pulses were studies by using nonlinear dynamic time-history analysis method, and the rationality of equivalent velocity pulse model was checked.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:02:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/773024</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>