Seismic Risks to Oregon Highways and

ODOT Mitigation Actions

ODOT Bridge Maintenance Conference – October 12, 2011

ODOT Seismic Mitigation Efforts for Bridges
1990 – Design for seismic loads considering Cascadia Subduction
Zone
1994/1997 – Assessment of vulnerability of existing bridges
1997 – Lifeline routes identified
1997 – Include “life-safety” retrofit of bridges in repair contracts
2007 – Network analysis of seismic vulnerability
2011 – Update to lifeline routes
2011 – Develop Oregon-Specific Bridge Response Fragility Curves
2011 – Refine traffic model for network analysis
2011 – Lab testing of retrofit for square columns used on older
bridges
2011 – Refine seismic demand model for long duration CSZ event
2011 - Perform typical designs for bridge retrofit
2011 – Prepare Legislative proposal for retrofit program 2
Seismic Bridge Design in Oregon
adopt FHWA 2009 LRFD Seismic Design Guide Specs
adopt USGS 2002 seismic hazard maps
seismic hazard maps and adoption of FHWA ‘83 seismic design specs.

seismic force up to 12%g

seismic force up to 6%g

Seismic loads typ.

not considered

3
 Major Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ)
Events have a 240-year frequency
HISTORY OF SEISMIC RISK IN OREGON  Scientist’s most recent
Last Known Subduction Event:
January, 1700
estimates found 41
earthquakes over 8.0
magnitude
Seismic Strain (Risk)

Past Subduction When will

 Last event January 26,

Zone Earthquakes
the strain
release next?

1700
 There is a very high
0 Frequency 1000 1700 2000 probability of a major
300 to 500 years

Time event within the next 50

years on the south
Oregon Coast.
Goldfinger,
Goldfinger, et al, OSU
4
 Earthquake Simulation Tool
Model of Oregon Highways
Scope of study:
 State owned
bridges
 Hwy. network:
Western Oregon,
Klamath Falls,
and the Columbia
River Gorge

5
 Cascadia Subduction Zone Earthquake
(Magnitude 9.0)
Estimates Loss:
6 complete collapses Damage States
 $1,080 million for bridge repair and Route
64 extensive replacement Slight Moderate Extensive Complete
106 major
 Significant Economic losses (travel time
164 slight related losses) I-5 (MWC) 4 1 0 0

I-5 (MLL) 16 3 1 0

I-5 (DJJ) 27 0 0 0

I-84 13 1 0 0

US-101 7 14 36 5

US-26 7 5 0 0

I-205 8 2 0 0

I-405 7 0 0 0

US-30 4 2 2 0

US-20 5 3 5 0

OR-38 3 2 1 0

OR-42 4 13 13 1

Others 59 60 6 0

Total 164 106 64 6

6
Solutions:
1. Retrofit existing bridges
2. Replace aging bridges
3. Prepare for recovery from damage and loss of mobility

Retrofit:
Phase 1 for “life safety” connects superstructure to the
substructure.
Phase 2 for “serviceability” strengthens the substructure

7
Seismic Retrofit Methods

8
 Retrofitting Progress
First 16 Years Since Vulnerability was Identified

Years Actions
1994/1997 CH2M Hill prioritization includes all state and local
bridges. Priority state bridges 1155
1994-2010 • Phase 1 retrofit added to repair projects 72
In the OTIA III program 6
• Replacements with seismic design 40
In the OTIA III program 150
Total number of bridges addressed 268
Future Bridges still need retrofitting (219 years) 887
Impact of OTIA III payback for 20 years.

9
Goal of seismic studies:
Establish Priorities for
Limited Retrofit $$

Bruce Johnson, State Bridge Engineer

ODOT Bridge Engineering Section

REDARS Research conducted by:

Peter Dusicka,
Dusicka, Assistant Professor
Portland State University

11