Pulse-like ground motion can cause greater damage to structures than nonpulse-like ground motion. Currently, much research is being conducted to determine the presence or absence of velocity pulses and to quantify them from seismic-acceleration record...
Pulse-like ground motion can cause greater damage to structures than nonpulse-like ground motion. Currently, much research is being conducted to determine the presence or absence of velocity pulses and to quantify them from seismic-acceleration records. Existing ground motion is divided into far-field (FF) and near-fault ground motion, based on the distance of the measurement point from the fault. Near-fault ground motion is further classified into near-fault pulse-like (NFP) and near-fault nonpulse-like (NFNP) ground motion by quantifying the presence or absence of velocity pulses. For each ground motion group, 40 FF, 40 NFP, and 40 NFNP ground motions are selected; thus, 120 ground motions are used in the seismic analysis to assess the seismic fragility of sample bridges. Probabilistic seismic demand models (PSDMs) are created by evaluating the seismic responses of two types of sample bridges with lead-rubber and elastomeric rubber bearings using three groups of ground motions. Seismic fragility analysis is performed using the PSDM, and from these results, the effect of the presence or absence of seismic velocity pulses on the seismic fragility is evaluated. From the comparison results of the seismic fragility curve, the seismic fragility of NFP ground motion appears to be approximately three to five times greater than that of NFNP ground motion, according to the presence or absence of a velocity pulse of seismic waves. This means that the damage to the bridge is greater in the case of NFP ground motion than that in the case of NFNP ground motion.