Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit Contents

4.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1

4.1.1 Expected Bridge Seismic Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-2
4.1.2 Expected Post-earthquake Service Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-2
4.1.3 Expected Post-earthquake Damage States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3
4.2 WSDOT Additions and Modifications to AASHTO Guide Specifications for
LRFD Seismic Bridge Design (SEISMIC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4
4.2.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4
4.2.2 Earthquake Resisting Systems (ERS) Requirements for Seismic Design
Categories (SDCs) C and D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4
4.2.3 Seismic Ground Shaking Hazard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-9
4.2.3.A Site Coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-10
4.2.4 Selection of Seismic Design Category (SDC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-10
4.2.5 Temporary and Staged Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11
4.2.6 Load and Resistance Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11
4.2.7 Balanced Stiffness Requirements and Balanced Frame Geometry
Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11
4.2.8 Selection of Analysis Procedure to Determine Seismic Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11
4.2.9 Member Ductility Requirement for SDCs C and D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11
4.2.10 Longitudinal Restrainers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11
4.2.11 Abutments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-12
4.2.12 Foundation – General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-16
4.2.13 Foundation – Spread Footing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-16
4.2.14 Procedure 3: Nonlinear Time History Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-16
4.2.15 Ieff for Box Girder Superstructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-16
4.2.16 Foundation Rocking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-16
4.2.17 Drilled Shafts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-16
4.2.18 Longitudinal Direction Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-17
4.2.19 Liquefaction Design Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-17
4.2.20 Reinforcing Steel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-17
4.2.21 Concrete Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-18
4.2.22 Expected Nominal Moment Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-18
4.2.23 Interlocking Bar Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-18
4.2.24 Splicing of Longitudinal Reinforcement in Columns Subject to Ductility
Demands for SDCs C and D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-18
4.2.25 Development Length for Column Bars Extended into Oversized Pile Shafts f
or SDCs C and D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-18
4.2.26 Lateral Confinement for Oversized Pile Shaft for SDCs C and D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-18
4.2.27 Lateral Confinement for Non-Oversized Strengthened Pile Shaft for SDCs
C and D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-18

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-i

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.2.28 Requirements for Capacity Protected Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-19

4.2.29 Superstructure Capacity Design for Transverse Direction (Integral Bent Cap) for
SDCs C and D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-19
4.2.30 Superstructure Design for Non Integral Bent Caps for SDCs B, C, and D . . . . . . . 4-19
4.2.31 Joint Proportioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-19
4.2.32 Cast-in-Place and Precast Concrete Piles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-20
4.2.33 Seismic Resiliency using Innovative Materials and Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-20
4.3 Seismic Design Requirements for Bridge Modifications and Widening Projects . . . . . . 4-21
4.3.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-21
4.3.2 Bridge Widening Project Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-21
4.3.2.A Minor Modification and Widening Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-21
4.3.2.B Major Modifications and Widening Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-21
4.3.3 Seismic Design Requirements Bridge Widening Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-22
4.3.4 Scoping for Bridge Widening and Liquefaction Mitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-24
4.3.5 Design and Detailing Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-24
4.4 Seismic Retrofitting of Existing Ordinary Bridges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-26
4.4.1 Seismic Analysis Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-26
4.4.2 Seismic Retrofit Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-27
4.4.3 Computer Analysis Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-27
4.4.4 Earthquake Restrainers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-27
4.4.5 Isolation Bearings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-27
4.5 Seismic Design Requirements for Retaining Walls and Buried Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-28
4.5.1 Seismic Design of Retaining Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-28
4.5.2 Seismic Design of Buried Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-28
4.99 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-29

Page 4-ii WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.1 General
Seismic design of new bridges and bridge widenings shall conform to LRFD-SGS as
modified by Sections 4.2 and 4.3.
Analysis and design of seismic retrofits for existing bridges shall be completed in
accordance with Section 4.4. Seismic design of retaining walls shall be in accordance with
Section 4.5. For nonconventional bridges, bridges that are deemed critical or Recovery,
or bridges that fall outside the scope of the Guide Specifications for any other reasons,
project specific design requirements shall be developed and submitted to the WSDOT
Bridge Design Engineer for approval.
The importance classifications for all highway bridges in Washington State are
classified as “Ordinary” except for special major bridges. Special major bridges fitting
the classifications of either “Critical” or “Recovery” will be so designated by either the
WSDOT Bridge and Structures Engineer or the WSDOT Bridge Design Engineer.
Bridges are considered as Critical, Recovery, or Ordinary for their operational classification
as described below. Two-level performance criteria are required for design of Recovery
and Critical bridges. Recovery and Critical bridges shall be designated by WSDOT Regions
or Local Agencies, in consultation with WSDOT State Bridge and Structures Engineer and
State Bridge Design Engineer.
• Critical Bridges
Critical bridges are expected to provide immediate access to emergency and similar
life-safety facilities after an earthquake. The Critical designation is typically reserved
for high-cost projects where WSDOT intends to protect the investment or for projects
that would be especially costly to repair if they were damaged during an earthquake.
• Recovery Bridges
Recovery bridges serve as vital links for rebuilding damaged areas and provide access
to the public shortly after an earthquake.
• Ordinary Bridges
All bridges not designated as either Critical or Recovery shall be designated
as Ordinary.

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-1

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.1.1 Expected Bridge Seismic Performance

The seismic hazard evaluation level for designing bridges shall be in accordance with
Table 4.1-1 for Safety Evaluation Earthquake (SEE) and/or Functional Evaluation
Earthquake (FEE).

Table 4.1-1 Seismic Hazard Evaluation Levels and Expected Performance

Expected Post Expected Post
Bridge Operational Seismic Hazard Earthquake Earthquake Service
Importance Category Evaluation Level Damage State Level
“Ordinary Bridges” –
SEE Significant No Service
Eastern Washington
“Ordinary Bridges” – SEE Significant No Service
Western Washington
FEE Minimal Full Service
(Not Lifeline)
“Recovery Bridges” SEE Moderate Limited Service
(Lifeline) FEE Minimal Full Service
SEE Minimal to Moderate Limited Service
“Critical Bridges”
FEE None to Minimal Full Service

4.1.2 Expected Post-earthquake Service Levels

• No Service – Bridge is closed for repair or replacement.
• Limited Service – Bridge is open for emergency vehicle traffic: A reduced number of
lanes for Ordinary traffic is available within three months of the earthquake; Vehicle
weight restriction may be imposed until repairs are completed. It is expected that
within three months (Recovery Bridges) or within three days (Critical Bridges) of the
earthquake, repair works on a damaged bridge would have reached the stage that
would permit Ordinary traffic on at least some portion of the bridge.
• Full Service – Full access to Ordinary traffic is available almost immediately after
the earthquake. The expected post-earthquake damage states and service levels of
Critical bridges are included in Table 4.1-2 to provide an indication of their expected
performance relative to Ordinary bridge categories.

Table 4.1-2 Displacement Ductility Demand Values, μD

Displacement Ductility Demand Limits
Ordinary Ordinary Bridges
Bridges – WW Recovery Bridges
• EW (Not Lifeline) (Lifeline) Critical Bridges
Seismic Critical Member • SEE SEE FEE SEE FEE SEE FEE
Wall Type Pier in Weak Direction 5.0 5.0 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 1.0
Wall Type Pier in Strong Direction 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Single Column Bent 5.0 5.0 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 1.0
Multiple Column Bent 6.0 6.0 2.0 3.5 2.0 1.5 1.0
Pile/Shaft-Column with Plastic 5.0 5.0 2.0 3.5 2.0 1.5 1.0
Hinge at Top of Column
Pile/Shaft-Column with Plastic 4.0 4.0 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 1.0
Hinge Below Ground
Superstructure 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Page 4-2 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

4.1.3 Expected Post-earthquake Damage States

• Significant – “imminent failure,” i.e., onset of compressive failure of core concrete.
Bridge replacement is likely. All plastic hinges within the structure have formed with
ductility demand values approaching the limits specified in Table 4.1-2.
• Moderate – “extensive cracks and spalling, and visible lateral and/or longitudinal
reinforcing bars”. Bridge repair is likely but bridge replacement is unlikely
• Minimal – “flexural cracks and minor spalling and possible shear cracks”. Essentially
elastic performance
• None – No damage
The Design Spectrum for Safety Evaluation Earthquake (SEE) shall be taken as a spectrum
based on a 7% probability of exceedance in 75 years (or approximate 1000-year return
period). BDM Section 4.2.3 provides the ground motion software tool SPECTRA to
develop spectral response parameters.
The Design Spectrum for Functional Evaluation Earthquake (FEE) shall be taken as a
spectrum based on a 30% probability of exceedance in 75 years (or 210-year return
period). The Geotechnical Engineer shall provide final design spectrum recommendations.
The FEE may be obtained using the USGS Interactive website
(https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive).
Ordinary and Recovery bridges subjected to the seismic hazard levels specified in Table 1
shall satisfy the displacement criteria specified in LRFD-SGS as applicable and the
maximum displacement ductility demand, μD values as specified in Table 4.1-2.

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-3

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.2 WSDOT Additions and Modifications to AASHTO Guide

Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design (SEISMIC)
WSDOT amendments to the LRFD-SGS are as follows:

4.2.1 Definitions
LRFD-SGS Article 2.1 – Add the following definitions:
• Oversized Pile Shaft – A drilled shaft foundation that is larger in diameter than the
supported column and has a reinforcing cage larger than and independent of the
columns. The size of the shaft shall be in accordance with Section 7.8.2.
• Owner – Person or agency having jurisdiction over the bridge. For WSDOT projects,
regardless of delivery method, the term “Owner” in these Guide Specifications
shall be the WSDOT State Bridge Design Engineer or/and the WSDOT State
Geotechnical Engineer.

4.2.2 Earthquake Resisting Systems (ERS) Requirements for Seismic Design

Categories (SDCs) C and D
LRFD-SGS Article 3.3 – WSDOT Global Seismic Design Strategies:
• Type 1 – Ductile Substructure with Essentially Elastic Superstructure. This category is
permissible.
• Type 2 – Essentially Elastic Substructure with a Ductile Superstructure. This category
is not permissible.
• Type 3 – Elastic Superstructure and Substructure with a Fusing Mechanism
between the two. This category is permissible with WSDOT State Bridge Design
Engineer’s approval.
With the approval of the State Bridge Design Engineer, for Type 1 ERS for SDC C or D,
if columns or pier walls are considered an integral part of the energy dissipating system
but remain elastic at the demand displacement, the forces to use for capacity design of
other components are to be a minimum of 1.2 times the elastic forces resulting from the
demand displacement in lieu of the forces obtained from overstrength plastic hinging
analysis. Because maximum limiting inertial forces provided by yielding elements acting
at a plastic mechanism level is not effective in the case of elastic design, the following
constraints are imposed. These may be relaxed on a case by case basis with the approval
of the State Bridge Design Engineer.
1. Unless an analysis that considers redistribution of internal structure forces due to
inelastic action is performed, all substructure units of the frame under consideration
and of any adjacent frames that may transfer inertial forces to the frame in question
must remain elastic at the design ground motion demand.
2. Effective member section properties must be consistent with the force levels
expected within the bridge system. Reinforced concrete columns and pier walls
should be analyzed using cracked section properties. For this purpose, in absence of
better information or estimated by Figure 5.6.2-1, a moment of inertia equal to one
half that of the un-cracked section shall be used.

Page 4-4 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

3. Foundation modeling must be established such that uncertainties in modeling will not
cause the internal forces of any elements under consideration to increase by more
than 10 percent.
4. When site specific ground response analysis is performed, the response spectrum
ordinates must be selected such that uncertainties will not cause the internal forces
of any elements under consideration to increase by more than 10 percent.
5. Thermal, shrinkage, prestress or other forces that may be present in the structure at
the time of an earthquake must be considered to act in a sense that is least favorable
to the seismic load combination under investigation.
6. P-Delta effects must be assessed using the resistance of the frame in question at the
deflection caused by the design ground motion.
7. Joint shear effects must be assessed with a minimum of the calculated elastic internal
forces applied to the joint.
8. Detailing as normally required in either SDC C or D, as appropriate, must be provided.
It is permitted to use expected material strengths for the determination of member
strengths except shear for elastic response of members.
The use of elastic design in lieu of overstrength plastic hinging forces for capacity
protection described above shall only be considered if designer demonstrates that
capacity design of Article 4.11 of the AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Bridge Seismic
Design is not feasible due to geotechnical or structural reasons.
If the columns or pier walls remain elastic at the demand displacement, shear design of
columns or pier walls shall be based on 1.2 times elastic shear force resulting from the
demand displacement and normal material strength shall be used for capacities. The
minimum detailing according to the bridge seismic design category shall be provided.
Type 3 ERS may be considered only if Type 1 strategy is not suitable and Type 3 strategy
has been deemed necessary for accommodating seismic loads. Use of isolation bearings
needs the approval of WSDOT State Bridge Design Engineer. Isolation bearings shall be
designed per the requirement specified in Section 9.3
Limitations on the use of ERS and ERE are shown in Figures 3.3-1a, 3.3-1b, 3.3-2,
and 3.3-3.
• Figure 3.3-1b Type 6, connection with moment reducing detail should only be used
at column base if proved necessary for foundation design. Fixed connection at base
of column remains the preferred option for WSDOT bridges.
• The design criteria for column base with moment reducing detail shall consider
all applicable loads at service, strength, and extreme event limit states.
• Figure 3.3-2 Types 6 and 8 are not permissible for non-liquefied configuration
and permissible with WSDOT State Bridge Design Engineer’s approval for
liquefied configuration.
For ERSs and EREs requiring approval, the WSDOT State Bridge Design Engineer’s
approval is required regardless of contracting method (i.e., approval authority is not
transferred to other entities).

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-5

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

BDM Figure 4.2.2-1 Figure 3.3-1a Permissible Earthquake-Resisting Systems (ERSs)

Longitudinal Response Longitudinal Response

1
~ T T ~
Permissible
=7 T ~
Permissible
2 Upon
l Approval
 Plastic hinges in inspectable locations or
elastic design of columns.
 Abutment resistance not required as part of  Isolation bearings accommodate full
ERS displacement
 Knock-off backwalls permissible  Abutment not required as part of ERS

Transverse Response Transverse or Longitudinal Response

3 T rz::
4
=7 I I r=

Permissible Permissible
Upon
 Plastic hinges in inspectable locations Approval
 Plastic hinges in inspectable locations.
 Isolation bearings with or without
 Abutment not required in ERS, breakaway shear keys energy dissipaters to limit overall
permissible with WSDOT Bridge Design Engineer’s displacements
Approval

Transverse or Longitudinal Response

Longitudinal Response
Permissible 6
5


r1 •. {
Abutment required to resist the design earthquake
Af_r_r_~ Not
elastically Permissible
 Longitudinal passive soil pressure shall be less than  Multiple simply-supported spans with
0.70 of the value obtained using the procedure given adequate support lengths
in BDM Article 4.2.11
 Plastic hinges in inspectable locations
or elastic design of columns

Figure 3.3-1a Permissible Earthquake-Resisting Systems (ERSs).

Page 4-6 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

BDM Figure 4.2.2-2 Figure 3.3-1b Permissible Earthquake-Resisting Elements (EREs)

2
Permissible Above ground / near
ground plastic hinges

Plastic hinges below cap beams

including pile bents
Permissible
1 4
Seismic isolation bearings or bearings Tensile yielding and
3 I ::::tj::: I designed to accommodate expected seismic
displacements with no damage
inelastic compression
buckling of ductile
concentrically braced
Permissible Upon Approval frames

Not Permissible

5
Piles with ‘pinned-head’ conditions 6 Permissible Upon
. •
Approval
Permissible Upon Approval . .
Columns with moment
·-:.-. /-::.-:_ .- • reducing or pinned hinge
details
.. .
Capacity-protected pile caps,
including caps with battered piles, Plastic hinges at base of
7 which behave elastically
8 wall piers in weak
direction
Permissible except
battered piles are Permissible
not allowed Spread footings that satisfy the
10 overturning criteria of Article 6.3.4

Pier walls with or without piles. Permissible

9
Permissible
12
Passive abutment resistance required Seat abutments whose backwall is
as part of ERS designed to fuse
11~ II- Use 70% of passive soil strength
designated in BDM Article 4.2.11 Permissible
Permissible
Columns with architectural
13 flares – with or without an
isolation gap
Seat abutments whose backwall
is designed to resist the expected
See Article 8.14
isolation gap impact force in an essentially
14 elastic manner
optional Permissible – isolation
gap is required Permissible

Figure 3.3-1 b Permissible Earthquake-Resisting Elements (EREs)

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-7

September 2023
 Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

BDM Figure 4.2.2-3 Figure 3.3-2 Permissible Earthquake-Resisting Elements That Require
Owner’s Approval

Not Permissible
~ II- f\-~
Passive abutment resistance
1 required as part of ERS Passive
2

Not Permissible
Strength
Use 100% of strength designated
in Article 5 .2 .3
I
- I
Sliding of spread footing abutment allowed to limit
force transferred

Limit movement to adjacent bent displacement capacity

Ductile End-diaphragms in
4
3 superstructure (Article 7 .4 .6) Not Permissible

Not Permissible Foundations permitted to rock

Use rocking criteria according to Appendix A

n
5

µmill Not Permissible

More than the outer line of piles in

group systems allowed to plunge or
uplift under seismic loadings
Wall piers on pile foundations that are not

p
strong enough to force plastic hinging into the
6 wall, and are not designed for the Design
Earthquake elastic forces Not Permissible
7
Ensure Limited Ductility Response in Piles Plumb piles that are not capacity-protected
according to Article 4 .7 .1 (e .g ., integral abutment piles or pile-supported
seat abutments that are not fused transversely)
Permissible Upon Ensure Limited Ductility Response in Piles
Approval for Liquefied according to Article 4 .7 .1
Configuration

8 9
In-ground hinging in shafts or piles .
Not Permissible
Ensure Limited Ductility Response
in Piles according to Article 4 .7 .1
Batter pile systems in which the geotechnical
Permissible Upon capacities and/or in-ground hinging define the
plastic mechanisms .
Approval for Liquefied
Configuration Ensure Limited Ductility Response in Piles
according to Article 4 .7 .1

Figure 3.3-2 Permissible Earthquake-Resisting Elements that Require Owner’s Approval

Page 4-8 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

BDM Figure 4.2.2-4 Figure 3.3-3 Earthquake-Resisting Elements that Are Not Recommended for
New Bridges

II I I I I
1 Cap beam plastic hinging (particularly
2 hinging that leads to vertical girder
movement) also includes eccentric
braced frames with girders supported
by cap beams
Plastic hinges in
superstructure
Not Permissible
Not Permissible

Battered-pile systems that are not

3 4 designed to fuse geotechnically or
structurally by elements with
adequate ductility capacity

Bearing systems that do not provide for the expected

displacements and/or forces (e .g ., rocker bearings)

Not Permissible Not Permissible

4.2.3 Seismic Ground Shaking Hazard

Figure 3.3-3 Earthquake-Resisting
LRFD-SGS Elements
Article 3.4 – For bridges that
that Are Not Recommended
are considered for Newor
Critical, Recovery Bridges
Ordinary
bridges with a site Class F, the seismic ground shaking hazard shall be determined based
on the WSDOT State Geotechnical Engineer recommendations.
In cases where the site coefficients used to adjust mapped values of design ground
motion for local conditions are inappropriate to determine the design spectra in
accordance with general procedure of Article 3.4.1 (such as the period at the end of
constant design spectral acceleration plateau (Ts) is greater than 1.0 second or the
period at the beginning of constant design spectral acceleration plateau (To) is less than
0.2 second), a site-specific ground motion response analysis shall be performed.
In the general procedure, the spectral response parameters shall be determined using
the most current version of the USGS 2014 Seismic Hazard Maps with Seven Percent
Probability of Exceedance in 75 yr (approximate 1000-yr Return Period).
The Design Spectrum for Functional Evaluation Earthquake (FEE) shall be taken
as a spectrum based on a 30% probability of exceedance in 75 years (or 210-year
return period).

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-9

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.2.3.A Site Coefficients

The LRFD-SGS Article 3.4.2.3-Site Coefficients shall be modified as shown in Tables
4.2.3-1 A through C:
The site coefficients for peak ground acceleration, Fpga, short-period range Fa, and for
long-period range Fv shall be taken as specified in the following Tables:

Table 4.2.3-1A Values of Site Coefficient, Fpga, for Peak Ground Acceleration
Mapped Peak Ground Acceleration Coefficient (PGA)
Site Class PGA ≤ 0.10 PGA = 0.2 PGA = 0.3 PGA = 0.4 PGA = 0.5 PGA ≥ 0.6
A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
B 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
C 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2
D 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1
E 2.4 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1
F * * * * * *

Table 4.2.3-1B Values of Site Coefficient, Fa, for 0.2-sec Period Spectral
Acceleration
Mapped Spectral Acceleration Coefficient at Period 0.2 sec (Ss)
Site Class Ss ≤ 0.25 Ss = 0.50 Ss = 0.75 Ss = 1.00 Ss = 1.25 Ss ≥ 1.50
A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
B 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
C 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2
D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0
E 2.4 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.9
F * * * * * *

Table 4.Values of Site Coefficient, Fv, for 1.0-sec Period Spectral Acceleration
Mapped Spectral Acceleration Coefficient at Period 1.0 sec (S1)
Site Class S1 ≤ 0.1 S1 = 0.2 S1 = 0.3 S1 = 0.4 S1 = 0.5 S1 ≥ 0.6
A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
B 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
C 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.4
D 2.4 2.2 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7
E 4.2 3.3 2.8 2.4 2.2 2.0
F * * * * * *
*Site-specific response geotechnical investigation and dynamic site response analysis should be
considered.
Note: Use straight line interpolation for intermediate values of PGA, Ss, and S1.

4.2.4 Selection of Seismic Design Category (SDC)

LRFD-SGS Article 3.5 – Pushover analysis shall be used to determine displacement
capacity for both SDCs C and D.

Page 4-10 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

4.2.5 Temporary and Staged Construction

LRFD-SGS Article 3.6 – For bridges that are designed for a reduced seismic demand,
the contract plans shall either include a statement that clearly indicates that the bridge
was designed as temporary using a reduced seismic demand or show the Acceleration
Response Spectrum (ARS) used for design. No liquefaction assessment required for
temporary bridges. The design response spectra given in Article 3.4 may be reduced by a
factor of not more than 2.5 to calculate the component elastic forces and displacements.

4.2.6 Load and Resistance Factors

LRFD-SGS Article 3.7 – Revise as follows:
Use load factors of 1.0 for all permanent loads. The load factor for live load shall be 0.0
when pushover analysis is used to determine the displacement capacity. Use live load
factor of 0.5 for all other extreme event cases. Unless otherwise noted, all ϕ factors shall
be taken as 1.0.

4.2.7 Balanced Stiffness Requirements and Balanced Frame Geometry

Recommendation
LRFD-SGS Articles 4.1.2 and 4.1.3 – Balanced stiffness between bents within a frame
and between columns within a bent and balanced frame geometry for adjacent frames
are required for bridges in both SDCs C and D. Deviations from balanced stiffness
and balanced frame geometry requirements require approval from the WSDOT Bridge
Design Engineer.

4.2.8 Selection of Analysis Procedure to Determine Seismic Demand

LRFD-SGS Article 4.2 – Analysis Procedures:
• Procedure 1 (Equivalent Static Analysis) shall not be used.
• Procedure 2 (Elastic Dynamic Analysis) shall be used for all “regular” bridges with two
through six spans and “not regular” bridges with two or more spans in SDCs B, C, or D.
• Procedure 3 (Nonlinear Time History) shall only be used with WSDOT Bridge Design
Engineer’s approval.

4.2.9 Member Ductility Requirement for SDCs C and D

LRFD-SGS Article 4.9 – In-ground hinging for drilled shaft and pile foundations may be
considered for the liquefied configuration with WSDOT Bridge Design Engineer approval.

4.2.10 Longitudinal Restrainers

LRFD-SGS Article 4.13.1 – Longitudinal restrainers shall be provided at the expansion
joints between superstructure segments. Restrainers shall be designed in accordance
with the FHWA Seismic Retrofitting Manual for Highway Structure (FHWA-HRT-06-032)
Article 8.4 the Iterative Method. See the earthquake restrainer design example in
the Appendix of this chapter. Restrainers shall be detailed in accordance with the
requirements of Guide Specifications Article 4.13.3 and Section 4.4.5. Restrainers may be
omitted for SDCs C and D where the available seat width exceeds the calculated support
length specified in Equation C4.13.1-1.
Omitting restrainers for liquefiable sites shall be approved by the WSDOT Bridge Design
Engineer.
Longitudinal restrainers shall not be used at the end piers (abutments).
WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-11
September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.2.11 Abutments
LRFD-SGS Article 5.2 – Diaphragm Abutment type shown in Figure 5.2.3.2-1 shall not be
used for WSDOT bridges.
LRFD-SGS Article 5.2 – Abutments to be revised as follows:
4.2.11.1 - General
The participation of abutment walls in providing resistance to seismically induced inertial
loads may be considered in the seismic design of bridges either to reduce column sizes
or reduce the ductility demand on the columns. Damage to backwalls and wingwalls
during earthquakes may be considered acceptable when considering no collapse criteria,
provided that unseating or other damage to the superstructure does not occur. Abutment
participation in the overall dynamic response of the bridge system shall reflect the
structural configuration, the load transfer mechanism from the bridge to the abutment
system, the effective stiffness and force capacity of the wall-soil system, and the level of
acceptable abutment damage. The capacity of the abutments to resist the bridge inertial
loads shall be compatible with the soil resistance that can be reliably mobilized, the
structural design of the abutment wall, and whether the wall is permitted to be damaged
by the design earthquake. The lateral load capacity of walls shall be evaluated on the basis
of a rational passive earth-pressure theory.
The participation of the bridge approach slab in the overall dynamic response of bridge
systems to earthquake loading and in providing resistance to seismically induced inertial
loads may be considered permissible upon approval from both the WSDOT Bridge Design
Engineer and the WSDOT Geotechnical Engineer.
The participation of the abutment in the ERS should be carefully evaluated with the
Geotechnical Engineer and the Owner when the presence of the abutment backfill may
be uncertain, as in the case of slumping or settlement due to liquefaction below or near
the abutment.
4.2.11.2 - Longitudinal Direction
Under earthquake loading, the earth pressure action on abutment walls changes from
a static condition to one of two possible conditions:
• The dynamic active pressure condition as the wall moves away from the backfill, or
• The passive pressure condition as the inertial load of the bridge pushes the wall into
the backfill.
The governing earth pressure condition depends on the magnitude of seismically induced
movement of the abutment walls, the bridge superstructure, and the bridge/abutment
configuration.
For semi-integral (Figure 4.2.11-1a), L-shape abutment with backwall fuse (Figure
4.2.11-1b), or without backwall fuse (Figure 4.2.11-1c), for which the expansion joint
is sufficiently large to accommodate both the cyclic movement between the abutment
wall and the bridge superstructure (i.e., superstructure does not push against abutment
wall), the seismically induced earth pressure on the abutment wall shall be considered to
be the dynamic active pressure condition. However, when the gap at the expansion joint
is not sufficient to accommodate the cyclic wall/bridge seismic movements, a transfer
of forces will occur from the superstructure to the abutment wall. As a result, the active
earth pressure condition will not be valid and the earth pressure approaches a much larger
passive pressure load condition behind the backwall. This larger load condition is the main

Page 4-12 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

cause for abutment damage, as demonstrated in past earthquakes. For semi-integral or

L-shape abutments, the abutment stiffness and capacity under passive pressure loading
are primary design concerns.

Figure 4.2.11-1 Abutment Stiffness and Passive Pressure Estimate

APPROACH SLAB APPROACH SLAB APPROACH SLAB

45° 45°
PASSIVE PASSIVE
10 PASSIVE

2H W
Hw

PP= 3
Hw
PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE

Hw
ZONE ZONE ZONE

Hw Hw

~r- DGRANULAR

LI\, □
ACTIVE ACTIVE
GRANULAR ACTIVE GRANULAR DRAINAGE
PRESSURE PRESSURE
DRAINAGE PRESSURE DRAINAGE MATERIAL
ZONE

P P = 0.0
ZONE ZONE
MATERIAL MATERIAL

_L_,
60°
_L,
60° 60°

(a) SEMI-INTEGRAL ABUTMENT (B) L-SHAPE ABUTMENT BACKWALL FUSES (C) L-SHAPE ABUTMENT BACKWALL DOES NOT FUSE

Where the passive pressure resistance of soils behind semi-integral or L-shape abutments
will be mobilized through large longitudinal superstructure displacements, the bridge
Figure 4.2.11-1
may be designed with the abutments as key elements of the longitudinal ERS. Abutments
shallAbutment
be designedstiffness
to sustainand Passive
the design Pressure
earthquake Estimate When abutment
displacements.
stiffness and capacity are included in the design, it should be recognized that the passive
pressure zone mobilized by abutment displacement extends beyond the active pressure
zone normally used for static service load design. This is illustrated schematically in
Figures 4.2.11-1a and 4.2.11-1b. Dynamic active earth pressure acting on the abutment
need not be considered in the dynamic analysis of the bridge. The passive abutment
resistance shall be limited to 70 percent of the value obtained using the procedure given
in Article 4.2.11.2.1.
4.2.11.2.1 - Abutment Stiffness and Passive Pressure Estimate
Abutment stiffness, Keff in kip/ft, and passive capacity, Pp in kips, should be characterized
by a bilinear or other higher order nonlinear relationship as shown in Figure 4.2.11-2.
When the motion of the back wall is primarily translation, passive pressures may be
assumed uniformly Hpw pWHww Ww over the height (Hw)(5.2.2.1-1)
Pp =Pppdistributed of the backwall or end diaphragm. The
(5.2.2.1-1)
p=
total passive force may be determined as:
where:
where: Pp = pp Hw Ww (4.2.11.2.1-1)

pWhere:
p = ppassive
p = passive
lateral
lateral
earthearth
pressure
pressure
behind
behind
backwall
backwall
or diaphragm
or diaphragm
(ksf)(ksf)
pp = passive lateral earth pressure behind backwall or diaphragm (ksf)
HHwheight
Hw = = of
height
w = height of of
back back
back
wall wall
wall
or ororend
end end diaphragm
diaphragm
diaphragm exposed
exposed
exposedtotopassive
to passive
passiveearth
earth pressure
earth
pressure (feet)
pressure
(ft) (ft)
Ww = width of back wall or diaphragm (feet)
Ww =Wwidth
w = width
of back
of back
wallwall
or diaphragm
or diaphragm
(ft) (ft)
Figure 4.2.11-2 Characterization of Abutment Capacity and Stiffness
Force Actual Behavior Force
K1~Ket11 p - - - --r-
P Ke1t1 .-/
../? l<eff2
~--~. ,,·

Deflection

(a) Semi-integral Abutment (b):(b)

(b):L-shape
L-shape
L-shape Abutment
Abutment
Abutment
(a) (a)Semi-integral
Semi-integral
Abutment
Abutment
WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-13
September 2023
Figure
Figure
5.2.2.1-
5.2.2.1-
Characterization
Characterization
of Abutment
of Abutment
Capacity
Capacity
and and
Stiffness
Stiffness
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.2.11.2.2 - Calculation of Best Estimate Passive Pressure Pp

If the strength characteristics of compacted or natural soils in the "passive pressure
zone" are known, then the passive force for a given height, Hw, may be calculated
using accepted analysis procedures. These procedures should account for the interface
friction between the wall and the soil. The properties used shall be those indicative of
the entire "passive pressure zone" as indicated in Figure 1. Therefore, the properties of
backfill present immediately adjacent to the wall in the active pressure zone may not be
appropriate as a weaker failure surface can develop elsewhere in the embankment.
For L-shape abutments where the backwall is not designed to fuse, Hw shall
conservatively be taken as the depth of the superstructure, unless a more rational soil-
structure interaction analysis is performed.
If presumptive passive pressures are to be used for design, then the following criteria
shall apply:
• Soil in the "passive pressure zone" shall be compacted in accordance with Standard
5.2.2.3-
Specifications Calculation
Section of Passive
2-03.3(14)I, which Soil Stiffness
requires compaction to 95 percent maximum
density for all “Bridge Approach Embankments”.
Equivalent linear secant stiffness, Keff in kip/ft, is required for analyses. For
• For cohesionless, nonplastic backfill (fines content less than 30 percent), the passive
semi-integral or L-shape abutments initial secant stiffness may be determined as fol-
pressure Pp may be assumed equal to 2Hw/3 ksf per foot of wall length.
lows:
Chapter 4 5.2.2.3-
For other cases, Calculation
including abutments of Passive
constructedSoil in
Stiffness
cuts, the passive pressures
Seismic shallRetrofit
Design and be
developed by a geotechnical engineer. P
4.2.11.2.3 - Calculation
Equivalentof Passive
linear Ksecant Soilstiffness,
eff 1 =
Stiffness
p
Keff in kip/ft,(5.2.2.3-1)
is required for analyses. For
4.2.11.2.3 - Calculation of Passive (
Soil F H )
Stiffness
semi-integral or L-shape abutments initial secant stiffness may be determined as fol-
w w
Equivalent
Equivalent linear
linear secant
secant stiffness,
stiffness, K Keff in kip/ft, is required for analyses. For semi-integral
lows: eff in kip/ft, is required for analyses. For semi-integral
or
or L-shape
L-shape abutments
where: initial
abutments initial secant
secant stiffness
stiffness maymay bebe determined
determined as as follows:
follows:
Pp
Pp = passive lateral K
earth
eff 1 =pressure capacity (kip) (5.2.2.3-1) (4.2.11.2.3-1)
(4.2.11.2.3-1)
(Fw H w )
Where:
Where: Hw = height of back wall (ft)
Pp
P =
= passive lateral earth
where:lateral
passive earth pressure
pressure capacity
capacity (kip)
(kip)
p
Hw = height of value
back wall
wall (feet)
H w = w = the
height
F of back of F(feet)
w to use for a particular bridge may be found in Table C3.11.1-1 of
Fw
F w
=
= the =the
passive
value
Ppvalue
the of
of Fw
Fw lateral
to
to
AASHTO LRFDuse
use earth
for
for pressure
aa Bridge
particular
particular capacity
bridge
bridge
Design may(kip)
may be found
be found in
in Table
Specifications. Table C3.11.1-1
C3.11.1-1 of
of the
the
AASHTO LRFD.
AASHTO LRFD.
For L-shapeFor = heightthe
HwL-shape
abutments, of expansion
back wall
abutments, the(ft)
gapexpansion should be gapincluded in the
should be initial in
included estimate of the
the initial estimate of
For L-shape abutments, the expansion gap should be included in the initial estimate of the
secant stiffness as specified
the secant in:
stiffness as specified in:
secant stiffness
Fw as specified
= the in:Fw to use for a particular bridge may be found in Table C3.11.1-1 of
value of 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝
the AASHTO𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒1
LRFD = Bridge
�𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤P𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 +𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷Design
𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔 � Specifications. (4.2.11.2.3-2)
K =
p
(5.2.2.3-2)
Where: (Fw H w + D g )
eff 1 (4.2.2.3-2)
Dg For L-shape
= width abutments,
of gap between the and
backwall expansion gap should
superstructure (feet) be included in the initial estimate of
Where:
the D,
secant
ForDSDCs=C where:
and stiffness as specified in: conducted, values of P and the initial
g width ofwhere pushover
gap between analyses
backwall are
and superstructure (feet) p
estimate of Keff1 should be used to define a bilinear load-displacement behavior of the
For SDCs Cforand Pp are conducted, values of P and the initial
abutment D =D,
gthe
where
capacity
width pushover
of gap K eff 1 analyses
assessment.
between = backwall and superstructure (ft) p
(5.2.2.3-2)
estimate of Keff1 should be used to define (Fw Haw bilinear
+ D g ) load-displacement behavior of the
4.2.11.2.4 - Modeling Passive Pressure Stiffness in the Longitudinal Direction
abutment for FortheSDCs C and
capacity D, where pushover analyses are conducted, values of Pp and the ini-
assessment.
In the longitudinal
where: direction, when
tial estimate of Keff1 should the bridge
be usedis to
moving
definetoward the load-displacement
a bilinear soil, the full passivebehavior of
4.2.11.2.4
resistance -ofModeling
the soil mayPassive Pressure Stiffness
be mobilized, but wheninthe thebridge
Longitudinal Direction
moves away from the soil no
the abutment for the capacity assessment.
soil resistanceDis g=mobilized. Since
width of gap passivebackwall
between pressure andactssuperstructure
at only one abutment
(ft) at a time,
In the elastic
linear longitudinal
dynamic direction,
modelswhen the bridge
and frame is moving
pushover modelstoward
shouldtheonly
soil,include
the fullapassive
passive
resistance of5.2.2.4-Modeling
the be Passive Pressure
mobilized, but when Stiffness
the bridgeinmoves
the Longitudinal
For SDCs C and D, where pushover analyses are conducted, values ofsoil
soil may away from Direction
the Pp no
and the ini-
soil resistance is mobilized. Since passive pressure acts at only one abutment at a time,
tial
theestimate of Keff1 should be usedthetomodels
defineisaBridge
bilinear load-displacement thebehavior
full pas- of
linear elasticIndynamiclongitudinal direction, when bridge moving toward thea soil,
Page 4-14 WSDOT Design Manual M 23-50.22
models and frame pushover should only include passive
September 2023
the resistance
sive abutment for thesoil
of the capacity
may assessment.
be mobilized, but stiffness
when thevalues
bridgefor moves away from
pressure spring at one abutment in any given model. Secant passive
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

pressure spring at one abutment in any given model. Secant stiffness values for passive
pressure shall be developed independently for each abutment.
As an alternative, for straight or with horizontal curves up to 30 degrees single frame
bridges, and compression models in straight multi-frame bridges where the passive
pressure stiffness is similar between abutments, a spring may be used at each abutment
concurrently. In this case, the assigned spring values at each end need to be reduced by
half because they act in simultaneously, whereas the actual backfill passive resistance acts
only in one direction and at one time. Correspondingly, the actual peak passive resistance
force at either abutment will be equal to the sum of the peak forces developed in two
springs. In this case, secant stiffness values for passive pressure shall be developed based
on the sum of peak forces developed in each spring. If computed abutment forces exceed
the soil capacity, the stiffness should be softened iteratively until abutment displacements
are consistent (within 30 percent) with the assumed stiffness.
4.2.11.3 - Transverse Direction
Transverse stiffness of abutments may be considered in the overall dynamic response of
bridge systems on a case by case basis upon State Bridge Design Engineer approval.
Upon approval, the transverse abutment stiffness used in the elastic demand models may
be taken as 50 percent of the elastic transverse stiffness of the adjacent bent.
Girder stops are typically designed to transmit the lateral shear forces generated by
small to moderate earthquakes and service loads and are expected to fuse at the design
event earthquake level of acceleration to limit the demand and control the damage in the
abutments and supporting piles/shafts. Linear elastic analysis cannot capture the inelastic
response of the girder stops, wingwalls or piles/shafts. Therefore, the forces generated
with elastic demand assessment models should not be used to size the abutment girder
stops. Girder stops for abutments supported on a spread footing shall be designed to
sustain the lesser of the acceleration coefficient, As, times the superstructure dead load
reaction at the abutment plus the weight of abutment and its footing or sliding friction
forces of spread footings. Girder stops for pile/shaft supported foundations shall be
designed to sustain the sum of 75 percent total lateral capacity of the piles/shafts and
shear capacity of one wingwall.
The elastic resistance may be taken to include the use of bearings designed to
accommodate the design displacements, soil frictional resistance acting against the base
of a spread footing supported abutment, or pile resistance provided by piles acting in their
elastic range.
The stiffness of fusing or breakaway abutment elements such as wingwalls (yielding or
non-yielding), elastomeric bearings, and sliding footings shall not be relied upon to reduce
displacement demands at intermediate piers.
Unless fixed bearings are used, girder stops shall be provided between all girders
regardless of the elastic seismic demand. The design of girder stops should consider that
unequal forces that may develop in each stop.
When fusing girder stops, transverse shear keys, or other elements that potentially release
the restraint of the superstructure are used, then adequate support length meeting
the requirements of Article 4.12 of the LRFD-SGS must be provided in the transverse
direction as well as the longitudinal direction. Additionally, the expected redistribution
of internal forces in the superstructure and other bridge system element must be

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-15

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

considered. Bounding analyses considering incremental release of transverse restraint at

each end of the bridge should also be considered.
4.2.11.4 - Curved and Skewed Bridges
Passive earth pressure at abutments may be considered as a key element of the ERS of
straight and curved bridges with abutment skews up to 20 degrees. For larger skews,
due to a combination of longitudinal and transverse response, the span has a tendency
to rotate in the direction of decreasing skew. Such motion will tend to cause binding in
the obtuse corner and generate uneven passive earth pressure forces on the abutment,
exceeding the passive pressure near one end of the backwall, and providing little or no
resistance at other end. This requires a more refined analysis to determine the amount
of expected movement. The passive pressure resistance in soils behind semi-integral or
L-shape abutments shall be based on the projected width of the abutment wall normal to
the centerline of the bridge. Abutment springs shall be included in the local coordinate
system of the abutment wall.

4.2.12 Foundation – General

LRFD-SGS Article 5.3.1 – The required foundation modeling method (FMM) and the
requirements for estimation of foundation springs for spread footings, pile foundations,
and drilled shafts shall be based on the WSDOT State Geotechnical Engineer’s
recommendations.

4.2.13 Foundation – Spread Footing

LRFD-SGS Article C5.3.2 – Foundation springs for spread footings shall be determined in
accordance with Section 7.2.7, Geotechnical Design Manual Section 6.5.1.1 and the
WSDOT State Geotechnical Engineer’s recommendations.

4.2.14 Procedure 3: Nonlinear Time History Method

LRFD-SGS Article 5.4.4 – The time histories of input acceleration used to describe
the earthquake loads shall be selected in consultation with the WSDOT Geotechnical
Engineer and the WSDOT State Bridge Design Engineer.

4.2.15 Ieff for Box Girder Superstructure

LRFD-SGS Article 5.6.3 – Gross moment of inertia shall be used for box girder
superstructure modeling.

4.2.16 Foundation Rocking

LRFD-SGS Article 6.3.9 – Foundation rocking shall not be used for the design of WSDOT
bridges.

4.2.17 Drilled Shafts

LRFD-SGS Article C6.5 – For WSDOT bridges, the scale factor for p-y curves or subgrade
modulus for large diameter shafts shall not be used unless approved by the WSDOT State
Geotechnical Engineer and WSDOT State Bridge Design Engineer.

Page 4-16 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

4.2.18 Longitudinal Direction Requirements

LRFD-SGS Article 6.7.1 – Case 2: Earthquake Resisting System (ERS) with abutment
contribution may be used provided that the mobilized longitudinal passive pressure is not
greater than 70 percent of the value obtained using procedure given in Article 5.2.2.1.

4.2.19 Liquefaction Design Requirements

LRFD-SGS Article 6.8 – Soil liquefaction assessment shall be based on the WSDOT State
Geotechnical Engineer’s recommendation and Geotechnical Design Manual Section 6.4.2.7.

4.2.20 Reinforcing Steel

LRFD-SGS Article 8.4.1 – Longitudinal reinforcement for ductile members in SDC’s B, C &
D, including foundations where in-ground-hinging is considered as part of the ERS, shall
conform to ASTM A706 Grade 60. ASTM A706 Grade 80 for longitudinal reinforcement
for ductile members in SDC’s B, C & D, including foundations where in-ground-hinging
is considered as part of the ERS may be used on a case-by-case basis with the WSDOT
State Bridge Design Engineer’s approval. See Section 5.1.2 for other requirements.
For SDCs B, C, and D, the moment-curvature analyses based on strain compatibility and
nonlinear stress strain relations shall be used to determine the plastic moment capacities
of all ductile concrete members. The properties of reinforcing steel, as specified in
Table 8-4.2-1, shall be used.
Deformed welded wire fabric may be used with the WSDOT State Bridge Design
Engineer’s approval.

Table 8.4.2-1 Properties for Reinforcing Steel Bars

ASTM ASTM ASTM
A706 A706 A615
Property Notation Bar Size Grade 60 Grade 80 Grade 60
Specified minimum yield strength (ksi) fy #3– #18 60 80 60
Expected yield strength (ksi) fye #3– #18 68 85 68
Expected tensile strength (ksi) fue #3– #18 95 112 95
Expected yield strain εye #3– #18 0.0023 0.0033 0.0023
#3– #8 0.0150 0.0150
#9 0.0125 0.0125
Tensile strain at the onset of
εsh #10 & #11 0.0115 0.0074 0.0115
strain hardening
#14 0.0075 0.0075
#18 0.0050 0.0050
εRsu #4– #10 0.090 0.060
Reduced ultimate tensile strain 0.060
#11– #18 0.060 0.040
εsu #4– #10 0.120 0.090
Ultimate tensile strain 0.095
#11– #18 0.090 0.060

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-17

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.2.21 Concrete Modeling

LRFD-SGS Article 8.4.4- Revise the last paragraph as follows:
Where in-ground plastic hinging approved by the WSDOT State Bridge Design Engineer
is part of the ERS, the confined concrete core shall be limited to a maximum compressive
strain of 0.008. The clear spacing between the longitudinal reinforcements and between
spirals and hoops in drilled shafts shall not be less than 6 inches or more than 8 inches
when tremie placement of concrete is anticipated.

4.2.22 Expected Nominal Moment Capacity

LRFD-SGS Article 8.5
Replace the definition of λmo with the following:
λmo= overstrength factor
= 1.2 for ASTM A 706 Grade 60 reinforcement
= 1.4 for ASTM A 615 Grade 60 reinforcement

4.2.23 Interlocking Bar Size

LRFD-SGS Article 8.6.7 – The longitudinal reinforcing bar inside the interlocking portion
of column (interlocking bars) shall be the same size of bars used outside the interlocking
portion.

4.2.24 Splicing of Longitudinal Reinforcement in Columns Subject to Ductility

Demands for SDCs C and D
LRFD-SGS Article 8.8.3 – The splicing of longitudinal column reinforcement outside
the plastic hinging region shall be accomplished using mechanical couplers that are
capable of developing the tensile strength of the spliced bar. Splices shall be staggered
at least 2 feet. Lap splices shall not be used. The design engineer shall clearly identify the
locations where splices in longitudinal column reinforcement are permitted on the plans.
In general where the length of the rebar cage is less than 60 ft (72 ft for No. 14 and No.
18 bars), no splice in the longitudinal reinforcement shall be allowed.

4.2.25 Development Length for Column Bars Extended into Oversized Pile Shafts f
or SDCs C and D
LRFD-SGS Article 8.8.10 – Extending column bars into oversized shaft shall be per
Section 7.4.4.C, based on TRAC Report WA-RD 417.1 “Non-Contact Lap Splice in Bridge
Column-Shaft Connections.”

4.2.26 Lateral Confinement for Oversized Pile Shaft for SDCs C and D
LRFD-SGS Article 8.8.12 – The requirement of this article for shaft lateral
reinforcement in the column-shaft splice zone may be replaced with Section 7.8.2 K.

4.2.27 Lateral Confinement for Non-Oversized Strengthened Pile Shaft for

SDCs C and D
LRFD-SGS Article 8.8.13 – Non oversized column shaft (the cross section of the confined
core is the same for both the column and the pile shaft) is not permissible unless
approved by the WSDOT State Bridge Design Engineer.

Page 4-18 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

4.2.28 Requirements for Capacity Protected Members

LRFD-SGS Article 8.9 – Add the following paragraphs:
For SDCs C and D where liquefaction is identified, with the WSDOT State Bridge Design
Engineer’s approval, pile and drilled shaft in-ground hinging may be considered as an ERE.
Where in-ground hinging is part of ERS, the confined concrete core should be limited to a
maximum compressive strain of 0.008 and the member ductility demand shall be limited
to 4.
Bridges shall be analyzed and designed for the non-liquefied condition and the liquefied
condition in accordance with Article 6.8. The capacity protected members shall be
designed in accordance with the requirements of Article 4.11. To ensure the formation
of plastic hinges in columns, oversized pile shafts shall be designed for an expected
nominal moment capacity, Mne, at any location along the shaft, that is, equal to 1.25
times moment demand generated by the overstrength column plastic hinge moment
and associated shear force at the base of the column. The safety factor of 1.25 may be
reduced to 1.0 depending on the soil properties and upon the WSDOT State Bridge
Design Engineer’s approval.
The design moments below ground for extended pile shaft may be determined using
the nonlinear static procedure (pushover analysis) by pushing them laterally to the
displacement demand obtained from an elastic response spectrum analysis. The point of
maximum moment shall be identified based on the moment diagram. The expected plastic
hinge zone shall extend 3D above and below the point of maximum moment. The plastic
hinge zone shall be designated as the “no splice” zone and the transverse steel for shear
and confinement shall be provided accordingly.

4.2.29 Superstructure Capacity Design for Transverse Direction (Integral Bent Cap)
for SDCs C and D
LRFD-SGS Article 8.11 – Revise the last paragraph as follows:
For SDCs C and D, the longitudinal flexural bent cap beam reinforcement shall
be continuous. Splicing of cap beam longitudinal flexural reinforcement shall be
accomplished using mechanical couplers that are capable of developing a minimum tensile
strength of 85 ksi. Splices shall be staggered at least 2 feet. Lap splices shall not be used.

4.2.30 Superstructure Design for Non Integral Bent Caps for SDCs B, C, and D
LRFD-SGS Article 8.12 – Non integral bent caps shall not be used for continuous
concrete bridges in SDC B, C, and D except at the expansion joints between
superstructure segments.

4.2.31 Joint Proportioning

LRFD-SGS Article 8.13.4.1.1 – Revise the last bullet as follows:
Exterior column joints for box girder superstructure and other superstructures if the cap
beam extends the joint far enough to develop the longitudinal cap reinforcement.

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-19

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.2.32 Cast-in-Place and Precast Concrete Piles

LRFD-SGS Article 8.16.2 – Minimum longitudinal reinforcement of 0.75 percent
of Ag shall be provided for CIP piles in SDCs B, C, and D. Longitudinal reinforcement
shall be provided for the full length of pile unless approved by the WSDOT Bridge
Design Engineer.

4.2.33 Seismic Resiliency using Innovative Materials and Construction

Innovative materials and bridge construction are ideas that encourage engineers to
consider principles that will enhance bridge performance, speed up construction, or add
any other benefit to the industry. BDM Section 14.4 describes the self-centering columns
that are designed restore much of their original shape after a seismic event. They’re
intended to improve the serviceability of a bridge after an earthquake. Self-centering
columns are constructed with a precast concrete column segment with a duct running
through it longitudinally. They rest on footings with post-tensioning (PT) strand developed
into them. Once the precast column piece is set on the footing, the PT strand threads
through the duct and gets anchored into the crossbeam above the column. The PT strand
is unbonded to the column segment. As a column experiences a lateral load, the PT strand
elastically stretches to absorb the seismic energy and returns to its original tension load
after the seismic event. The expectation is the column would rotate as a rigid body and
the PT strand would almost spring the column back to its original orientation.
Self-centering in bridge columns can be achieved using Shape Memory Alloy (SMA)
and Engineered Cementitious Composite (ECC). These products are introduced into
bridge design as a means to improve ductility, seismic resiliency, and serviceability of a
bridge after an earthquake. SMA is a class of alloys that are manufactured from either
a combination of nickel and titanium or copper, magnesium and aluminum. The alloy
is shaped into round bars in sizes similar to conventional steel reinforcement. When
stressed, the SMA can undergo large deformations and return to original shape.

Page 4-20 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

4.3 Seismic Design Requirements for Bridge Modifications and

Widening Projects
4.3.1 General
A bridge modification or widening is defined as where substructure bents are modified
and new columns or piers are added, or an increase of bridge deck width or widenings to
the sidewalk or barrier rails of an existing bridge resulting in significant mass increase or
structural changes.
Bridge widenings in Washington State shall be designed in accordance with the
requirements of the current edition of the LRFD-BDS. The seismic design of Ordinary,
Recovery and Critical bridges shall be in accordance with the requirements of the LRFD-
SGS, and WSDOT BDM.
The spectral response parameters shall be determined using USGS 2014 Seismic Hazard
Maps and Site Coefficients defined in Section 4.2.3. The widening portion (new structure)
shall be designed to meet current WSDOT standards for new Ordinary, Recovery and
Critical bridges. Seismic analysis is required in accordance with Section 4.3.3 and is not
required for single span bridges and bridges in SDC A. However, existing elements of
single span bridges shall meet the requirements of LRFD-SGS as applicable.

4.3.2 Bridge Widening Project Classification

Bridge widening projects are classified according to the scope of work as either minor or
major widening projects.

4.3.2.A Minor Modification and Widening Projects

A bridge widening project is classified as a minor widening project if all of the following
conditions are met:
• Substructure bents are not modified and no new columns or piers are added, while
abutments may be widened to accommodate the increase of bridge deck width.
• The net superstructure mass increase is equal or less than 10 percent of the original
superstructure mass.
• Fixity conditions of the foundations are unchanged.
• There are no major changes of the seismicity of the bridge site that can increase
seismic hazard levels or reduce seismic performance of the structure since the initial
screening or most recent seismic retrofit.
• No change in live load use of the bridge.

4.3.2.B Major Modifications and Widening Projects

A bridge widening project is classified as a major widening project if any of the following
conditions are met:
• Substructure bents are modified and new columns or piers are added, excepting
abutments, which may be widened to accommodate the increase of bridge deck width.
• The net superstructure mass increase is more than 20 percent of the original
superstructure mass.
• Fixity conditions of the foundations are changed.
• There are major changes of the seismicity of the bridge site that can increase seismic
hazard levels or reduce seismic performance of the structure since the initial screening
or most recent seismic retrofit.
• Change in live load use of the bridge
WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-21
September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

Major changes in seismicity include, but are not limited to, the following: near fault effect,
significant liquefaction potential, or lateral spreading. If there are concerns about changes
to the Seismic Design Response Spectrum at the bridge site, about a previous retrofit
to the existing bridge, or an unusual imbalance of mass distribution resulting from the
structure widening, the designer should consult the WSDOT Bridge and Structures Office.

4.3.3 Seismic Design Requirements Bridge Widening Projects

The Seismic Design requirements for Bridge Modifications and Widening are as follows
and as illustrated in BDM Figure 4.3-1:
1. Ordinary bridge modification or widening projects classified as Minor Modification
or Widening do not require either a seismic evaluation or a retrofit of the structure.
If the conditions for Minor Modification or Widening project are met, it is anticipated
that the modified or widened structure will not draw enough additional seismic
demand to significantly affect the existing sub-structure elements.
2. Seismic analysis is required for all Major Modifications and Widening projects at
project scoping level in accordance with Section 4.1. A complete seismic analysis is
required for Ordinary bridges in Seismic Design Category (SDC) B, C, and D for major
modifications and widening projects as described below. A project geotechnical
report (including any unstable soil or liquefaction issues) shall be available to the
structural engineer for seismic analysis. Seismic analysis shall be performed for both
existing and widened structures. Capacity/Demand (C/D) ratios are required for
existing bridge elements including foundation.
3. The widening portion of the structure shall be designed for liquefiable soils condition
in accordance to the LRFD-SGS, and WSDOT BDM, unless soils improvement is
provided to eliminate liquefaction.
4. Procedure for Ordinary Bridges: Seismic improvement of existing columns and
crossbeams to C/D > 1.0 is required. The cost of seismic improvement shall be
paid for with widening project funding (not from the Retrofit Program). The seismic
retrofit of the existing Ordinary structure shall conform to the BDM, while the
newly widened portions of the bridge shall comply with the LRFD-SGS, except for
balanced stiffness criteria, which may be difficult to meet due to the existing bridge
configuration. However, the designer should strive for the best balanced frame
stiffness for the entire widened structure that is attainable in a cost effective manner.
Major Modification and Widening Projects require the designer to determine the
seismic C/D ratios of the existing bridge elements in the final widened condition. If
the C/D ratios of columns and crossbeam of existing structure are less than 1.0, the
improvement of seismically deficient elements is mandatory and the widening project
shall include the improvement of existing seismically deficient bridge elements to
C/D ratio of above 1.0. The C/D ratio of 1.0 is required to prevent the collapse of the
bridge during the seismic event as required for life safety. Seismic improvement of
the existing foundation elements (footings, pile caps, piles, and shafts to C/D ratios
> 1.0) could be deferred to the Bridge Seismic Retrofit Program.
5. Procedure for Recovery/Critical Bridges: The initial goal is to conduct the seismic
design effort so the composite structure (existing bridge and widening) meet
requirements of the two-level seismic design (FEE and SEE) de-scribed in BDM
Section 4.1. This includes the superstructure, substructure and foundation elements
of the composite structure. Retrofitting or strengthening of the existing structure

Page 4-22 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

may be necessary to achieve this. Depending on the year the bridge was constructed,
type of foundation and capacity of the soils during a seismic event, it may become
expensive to meet this goal. If the Engineer determines it is cost prohibitive to
meet the two-level design criteria, the State Bridge Design Engineer may approve
deviations. Examples of potential deviations include:
A. Meeting two-level design criteria for the widened portion, but only achieving
Ordinary bridge criteria for the existing bridge.
B. Meeting two-level design criteria for the above-ground portions of the
composite structure, but not achieving this for the below-ground portions
(foundations).
C. Performing a two-level design, but requiring deviations from the displacement
ductility demand limits identified in BDM Section 4.1.
D. Only achieving Ordinary (no collapse) criteria for the composite structure.
Modifications or Widening Alterations Seismic Design Guidance Illustration
Modifications
Figure 4.3-1
Modifications or
or Widening
Seismic Design
Widening Alterations Seismic
Criteria for Bridge
Alterations Design
Design Guidance
Modifications
Seismic and Widening
Guidance Illustration
Illustration
Modifications
Minor or
ModificationsWidening Alterations
• Superstructure Seismic
• Do not Design
RequireGuidance
seismic Illustration
Modifications
Minor Modificationsor Widening
Widening • Alterations
• Superstructure Seismic
•
• Do
Do not Design
Require Guidance
seismic Illustration
•Modifications
Minor
Deck
Minor Modificationsor
Rehabilitations
Modifications • Alterations
Superstructure
mass increase is
Superstructure Seismic
• notDesign
RequireGuidance
evaluation
Do not Require seismic
seismic Illustration
•
• Deck
Minor
Deck Rehabilitations
Modifications
Rehabilitations mass
massthanincrease
10% is
• Superstructure
increase is • evaluation
Do not Require
evaluation
• evaluation seismic
• Traffic
Deck Barrier Replacements
Rehabilitations less
mass increase is Do not require retrofit of
• Traffic
Deck Barrier Replacements
TrafficRehabilitations
• Traffic
sidewalkBarrier Replacements
addition/ less
mass than
less than
• less
Fixitythan 10%
increase
10% is
conditions • Do
Do not require
require retrofit
• evaluation
the not
structure retrofit of
of
• Barrier Replacements 10% • Do not require retrofit of
• sidewalk
Traffic
• sidewalk addition/
Barrier
rehabilitation Replacements
sidewalk addition/
addition/ • Fixity
• less
Fixity
are notconditions
than 10%
conditions
changed the
• Do structure
not require
the structure
structure retrofit of
• • Fixity conditions the
• rehabilitation
sidewalk
No addition/
rehabilitation
change in LL use
rehabilitation
are not
• Fixity
are not
are
changed
conditions
not changed
changed the structure
•
• No
No change
change in
rehabilitationin LL
LL use
use are not changed
• No change in LL use
• No change in LL use
Major Modifications • Superstructure • Seismic evaluation of the
Major
Major Modifications • Superstructure
Superstructure • Seismic
Seismic evaluation
evaluation of the
the
Minor Modifications
Major Modifications
Modifications PLUS •
• mass increase
Superstructure •
• structure is required .
Seismic evaluation of
of the
Major Modifications mass
• mass increase
Superstructure structure
• structure
Seismic is required .
evaluation of the
Minor
Minor
Minor
Modifications PLUS
Modifications
• Replacing/adding
Modifications PLUS
PLUS
girder and mass increase
between 10% to
increase Do-No-Harm is required.
required .
is required
structure is required .
between
mass 10% to
increase to • Do-No-Harm
Do-No-Harm is required
required
• Replacing/adding
Replacing/adding
Minor
• Modifications girder and
PLUS
Replacing/adding girder
• slab
and
girder and
between
20% and/or
between 10%
10% to • structure
• for is required .
substructure .
Do-No-Harm is
is required
slab
• slab
Replacing/adding girder and 20%
20%
• Fixityand/or
between 10%
and/or
conditionsto for substructure.
• for substructure .
Do-No-Harm
substructure . is required
Change
slab in LL use 20% and/or for substructure .
• Fixity
Fixity conditions • Do-No-Harm
Do-No-Harm is required
required
•• Change
Change in
• slab
in LL use
Change in LL
use
LL use • 20%
• are and/or
conditions
changed
Fixity conditions • for
• substructure .
foundation .is
Do-No-Harm is required
• Change in LL use are changed
• are changed
Fixity conditions for foundation.
• for foundation .
Do-No-Harm
foundation . is required
are changed for foundation .
Major Widening – Case 1 • are changed
Superstructure • for foundation .
Seismic evaluation of the
Major
Major Widening – Case 1 •
• Superstructure
Superstructure •
• Seismic
Seismic evaluation
evaluation of
of the
the
Major Widening
Minor Widening
Modifications–
– Case
Case 1
1
PLUS • Superstructure
• mass increase is
Superstructure • Seismic
Seismic evaluation
structure
• structure is required .
evaluation of
of the
the
Major
Minor
Minor
• Widening
Modifications
Modifications
Superstructure – Case
or 1
PLUS
PLUS
Bent • mass
mass
mass
more
mass
increase
increase
Superstructure
increase
than > 20%
increase
is
is
is
is
structure
• structure
Seismic
C/D
structure
is
is
is
ratio is
required.
required .
evaluation
required .
of required .
equal or of the
Minor Modifications PLUS more
more than
than >
> 20%
20% •
• C/D
C/D ratio of
ratiothan equal or
of required .
equal or
• Superstructure
Minor Modifications or Bent mass
more
and/or increase
than > 20%is • structure
C/D
C/D ratio
greater is
of
of equal
1 .0 isor
•
• Superstructure
Widening
Superstructure or PLUS
or Bent
Bent more
and/or
and/or
than > 20% • greater
ratio
greater than
than
equal
1.0
1 .0 is
is
or
Widening
• Widening
Superstructure or Bent more
and/orthan > 20%
• and/or
Substructure/bents • greater
C/D ratio
required
greater of
than
than equal
1 .0
1 .0 is or
for substructure .
is
Widening •
• Substructure/bents
Substructure/bents required
required for
for substructure.
substructure .
Widening • and/or
Substructure/bents
• modified and/or
Substructure/bents greater
requiredthan
• required
Do-No-Harm for 1 .0 is be
for substructure .
could
substructure .
• modified
modified and/or
and/or
Substructure/bents
modified and/or •
• Do-No-Harm
• Do-No-Harm
Do-No-Harm
required for could
could be
be
substructure .
could
•
Fixity conditions
modified and/or used
• used
Do-No-Harm could be
for Foundation . be
• Fixity
• Fixity conditions
conditions
modified
Fixity
are and/or
conditions
changed
for
used for
• used
Do-No-Harm Foundation.
for Foundation .
Foundation .
could be
• are
Fixity conditions used for Foundation .
are changed
• are changed
Fixity conditions used for Foundation .
Major Widening
Major Widening –– Case
Case 2
2 are changed
changed
• Substructure or • Seismic evaluation of the
Major
Major Widening
Widening – Case
– 2 are changed
• Substructure
Substructure or or • Seismic
Seismic evaluation of the
•• widening
widening
Major Widening
on – Case
on one
one side2
Case
side2 •
• bents are modified.
Substructure or • Seismic evaluation
• structure required .
is required.
evaluation of
of the
the
• widening
widening
Major on one
Widening one
– side2
Case bents are
• Columns are modified.
Substructuremodified.
or • structureevaluation
Seismic is required .
required .
• on side
• widening on one side bents
bents arearemodified. structure
• C/D ratio is
structure is equal or the
of required . of
• widening on one side Columns
bents are are
modified. • C/D
C/D ratio is
structure of equal
equal or
Columns
added
Columns on are
one
are side .
side. • C/D ratio
• greater
ratio of required .
of
than 1 .0 isor
1.0
equal or
added on are
Columns
added one side . greater
• required
C/D ratiothan
of 1 .0
equal is or
added on on one
one side .
side . greater than
greater than 1 .0 is
substructure .
for substructure.
1 .0 is
added on one side . required for
greater for substructure .
requiredthan
required
• Do-No-Harm 1 .0 is be
for substructure .
could
substructure .
• Do-No-Harm
• Do-No-Harm
required for could be
substructure .
could
• used could be
Foundation .
for Foundation.
Do-No-Harm be
• •
• used
used for
Do-No-Harm
for Foundation .
could
Foundation . be
Major
Major Widening
Widening –– Case
Case 3
3 • Substructure
Substructure • Seismic
used
Seismicfor evaluation
Foundation .
evaluation of
of the
the
Major Widening – Case 3 • or
Substructure used for evaluation
• structure
Seismic Foundation .
evaluation of the
• widening
Major
• widening
Major on
Widening both
–
on both
Widening sides
Case 3
sides
– Case 3 • or bents
bents are
• Substructure
are
Substructure • Seismic is required.
structureevaluation
• Seismic is required . of
of the
the
• widening
widening
Major
• on both
Widening
on both sides
– Case 3
sides or bents
• modified.are
Columns
Substructure
or bents • structure
• C/D
C/D ratio
Seismic is
of required .
equal
equal or
ratioevaluation orof the
• widening on both sides or bents are
modified. Columns
are structure
structure is
of required .
is required .
• widening on both sides modified.
are
or added
bents
modified. Columns
areon
are addedColumns
on • greater
• C/D ratio
structure
C/D ratio
greater of
than
is
of equal
1.0 is
required .
equal or
or
modified. Columns • C/D ratiothan 1 .0 isor
of equal
are
bothadded
sides.
modified. on
Columns greater
• required
C/D than
for
ratiothan 1 .0 is
is
substructure.
of equal
are
are added
sides .on
bothadded on greater
required
greater for
than 1 .0 isor
1 .0
substructure .
bothadded
are
both sides .on • required
Do-No-Harm
greater for
than substructure .
could
could be
1 .0 is
both sides .
sides . required
• required
Do-No-Harm for substructure .
be
for substructure .
both sides . • used
• Do-No-Harm
for
required
Do-No-Harm for could
Foundation. be
substructure .
could
• Do-No-Harm could be
used for Foundation . be
used for
• used for Foundation .
Do-No-Harm could be
used for Foundation .
Foundation .
used for Foundation .

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-23

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.3.4 Scoping for Bridge Widening and Liquefaction Mitigation

The Region project manager should contact the Bridge Office for bridge widening and
retaining wall scoping assistance before project funding commitments are made to the
legislature and the public. The WSDOT Bridge and Structures office will work with the
WSDOT Geotechnical Office to assess the potential for liquefaction or other seismic
hazards that could affect the cost of the proposed structures. The initial evaluation
design time and associated costs for the WSDOT Geotechnical and WSDOT Bridge and
Structures offices shall be considered at the scoping phase.

4.3.5 Design and Detailing Considerations

Support Length – The support length at existing abutments, piers, in-span hinges, and
pavement seats shall be checked. If there is a need for longitudinal restrainers, transverse
restrainers, or additional support length on the existing structure, they shall be included in
the widening design.
Connections Between Existing and New Elements – Connections between the new
elements and existing elements should be designed for maximum over-strength forces.
Where yielding is expected in the crossbeam connection at the extreme event limit state,
the new structure shall be designed to carry live loads independently at the Strength I
limit state. In cases where large differential settlement and/or a liquefaction-induced loss
of bearing strength are expected, the connections may be designed to deflect or hinge in
order to isolate the two parts of the structure. Elements subject to inelastic behavior shall
be designed and detailed to sustain the expected deformations.
Longitudinal joints between the existing and new structure are not permitted.
Differential Settlement – The geotechnical designer should evaluate the potential for
differential settlement between the existing structure and widening structure. Additional
geotechnical measures may be required to limit differential settlements to tolerable
levels for both static and seismic conditions. The bridge designer shall evaluate, design,
and detail all elements of new and existing portions of the widened structure for the
differential settlement warranted by the WSDOT State Geotechnical Engineer. Angular
distortions between adjacent foundations greater than 0.008 (RAD) in simple spans and
0.004 (RAD) in continuous spans should not be permitted in settlement criteria.
The horizontal displacement of pile and shaft foundations shall be estimated using
procedures that consider soil-structure interaction (see Geotechnical Design Manual
Section 8.12.2.3). Horizontal movement criteria should be established at the top of
the foundation based on the tolerance of the structure to lateral movement with
consideration of the column length and stiffness. Tolerance of the superstructure
to lateral movement will depend on bridge seat widths, bearing type(s), structure type,
and load distribution effects.
Foundation Types – The foundation type of the new structure should match that of the
existing structure. However, a different type of foundation may be used for the new
structure due to geotechnical recommendations or the limited space available between
existing and new structures. For example, a shaft foundation may be used in lieu of
spread footing.

Page 4-24 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

Existing Strutted Columns – The horizontal strut between existing columns may be
removed. The existing columns shall then be analyzed with the new unbraced length and
retrofitted if necessary.
Non Structural Element Stiffness – Median barrier and other potentially stiffening
elements shall be isolated from the columns to avoid any additional stiffness
to the system.
Deformation capacities of existing bridge members that do not meet current detailing
standards shall be determined using the provisions of Section 7.8 of the Retrofitting
Manual for Highway Structures: Part 1 – Bridges, FHWA-HRT-06-032. Deformation
capacities of existing bridge members that meet current detailing standards shall be
determined using the latest edition of the LRFD-SGS.
Joint shearSeismic
capacities ofRetrofit
Design and existing structures shall be checked using Caltrans Bridge Design
Chapter 4

Aid, 14-4 Joint Shear Modeling Guidelines for Existing Structures.

• Deformation capacities of existing bridge members that do not meet current detailing standards shall
In lieu of specific data, the
be determined usingreinforcement properties
the provisions of Section provided
7.8 of the Retrofitting in Table
Manual 4.3.5‑1
for Highway should
Structures:
be used. Part 1 – Bridges, FHWA-HRT-06-032. Deformation capacities of existing bridge members that
meet current detailing standards shall be determined using the latest edition of the AASHTO Guide
Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design.
4.3.2-1
Table 4.3.5-1 Stress Properties
• Joint shear capacities Properties
of existing of
of Reinforcing
shall be checkedSteel
Reinforcing
structures Steel Bars
Bars Bridge Design Aid, 14-4
using Caltrans
BDM Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit
Joint Shear Modeling Guidelines for Existing Structures.
ASTM ASTM A615 ASTM A615
• In lieu of specific data, the reinforcement properties provided
ASTM in Table 4.3.2-1
A615 should be used.
Property Property Notation Bar Size
Notation Bar Size A706 Grade 60 Grade 40*
ASTM ASTM A615
A706 Grade 60 Grade 40
Specified minimum Specified ASTM ASTM A615 ASTM A615
Property ƒfyy
minimum yield Notation No.#183Size
-Bar - No.6018 A706 6060 Grade 60 60 40
yield stress (ksi) #3 40 Grade 40
stress (ksi)
Specified minimum
Expected yield stress
yield stress (ksi)
Expected yield
(ksi) ƒfƒye
y
ye No.
#3 - #183 - No.68
#3 - #18 18 60 68
68
60 68
48
40 48
stress (ksi)
Expected tensile
Expectedstrength (ksi)
yieldExpected ƒƒue No.#3 3 - No. 18 68
- #18 95 68 95 48 81
68
stress (ksi) ye
tensile strength f ue #3 - #18 95 95 81
Expected yield strain
Expected (ksi)
tensile ε ye No. 3 - No. 18 0.0023 0.0023 0.00166
ƒue #3 - #18 95 95 81
strength (ksi) Expected yield  ye #3No.
- #183 - No.
strain 8
0.0023 0.0150
0.0023 0.0150
0.00166
Expected
εye #3 -#3
#8-No.
#18 0.01500 .0023 0.0150 0 .0023 0 .00166
yield strain No. 99 0.0125
0.0125 0.0125
#9#3 - #8 0.01250 .0150 0.0125 0 .0150
Onset of strain hardening
Onset of strain ε sh No. 10 #9
& No. 11 0.0115 0.0115 0.0193
 sh #10 & #11 0.01150 .0125 0.0115 0 .0125 0.0193
Onset of hardening
εsh #10No. 14
& #11 0 .01150.00750 .0115 0.0075 0 .0193
strain hardening #14 0.0075 0.0075
#14 0 .0075 0 .0075
#18 No. 18 0.0050 0.0050
0.0050 0.0050
#18 0 .0050 0 .0050
Reduced ultimate
Reduced
R
No.
#4 #104
- #4 - No.
- #10 10 0 .090 0.090
0.090 0.060 0 .060 0.060
0.090 0 .090 0.090
Reduced ultimate tensile
tensile strain strain
ultimate tensile  su
#11 - #18 0 .060 0 .040 0.060 0 .060
strain No. 11 - No. 18
#11 - #18 0.060 0.060
0.040 0.040 0.060
Ultimate #4 - #4
#10- #10 0.120 0 .120
0.090 0 .090 0.120 0 .120
tensile strain
Ultimate εsu
su No.#114- #18
- No. 10 0 .090
0.120 0 .060 0.0900 .090 0.120
Ultimate tensile straintensile strain εsu #11 - #18 0.090 0.060 0.090
No. of
Stress Properties 11Reinforcing
- No. 18 Steel
0.090
Bars 0.060 0.090
Table 4.3.2-1
**ASTM A615 Grade 40 is for existing bridges in widening
Table 4.3.2-1 projects.
Stress Properties of Reinforcing Steel Bars.

Isolation Bearings – Isolation bearings may be used for bridge widening projects to
reduce the seismic demand through modification of the dynamic properties of the bridge.
These bearings are a viable alternative to strengthening weak elements or non-ductile
bridge substructure members of the existing bridge. Use of isolation bearings needs the
approval of WSDOT Bridge Design Engineer. Isolation bearings shall be designed per the
requirements specified in Section 9.3.

Bridge Design Manual M23-50-02 Page 31

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-25

September 2023 Page 4.3-4 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.06
July 2011
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.4 Seismic Retrofitting of Existing Ordinary Bridges

Seismic retrofitting of existing ordinary bridges shall be performed in accordance with the
FHWA publication FHWA-HRT-06-032, Seismic Retrofitting Manual for Highway Structures:
4 .4
4 .4
Part 1 – Bridges4 .4 Seismic
Seismic
Seismic
and WSDOT Retrofitting
Retrofitting
Retrofitting
amendments of
of Existing
ofExisting
as follows: Bridges
ExistingBridges
Bridges
4 .4 Seismic Retrofitting of Existing Bridges
Seismic
Seismic retrofitting
retrofitting of existing
of existing bridges
bridges shall be
shall beusing
performed in accordance
accordance with
wit
• Article 1.5.3 The spectral response
Seismic
Seismic parameters
retrofitting
retrofitting of shall be
of existing
existing determined
bridges
bridges beperformed
shall be
shall USGS in
performed
performed 2014
in accordance
in accordance wit
wi
FHWA
Seismic Hazard MapsFHWA publication
publication FHWA-HRT-06-032,
FHWA-HRT-06-032, Seismic
Seismic Retrofitting
Retrofitting Manual
Manual for
for H
and Site Coefficients
FHWA publication
FHWA defined in
publication FHWA-HRT-06-032,Section 4.2.3.
FHWA-HRT-06-032, Seismic Seismic Retrofitting
Retrofitting Manual forHH
Manual for H
Structures: Part
Structures: Part 11 –– BridgesBridges and and WSDOT
WSDOT amendments
amendments as as follows:
follows:
Structures:
• Article 7.4.2 Seismic Loading Part
in Two
Structures: or11
Part –– Bridges
ThreeBridges and WSDOT
and WSDOT
Orthogonal amendments as
amendments
Directions as follows:
follows:
Article 7.4.2
• Article 7.4.2 SeismicSeismic Loading Loading in in Two
Two oror Three
Three Orthogonal
Orthogonal Directions
Directions
Revise the first paragraph•••asArticle
Article
follows: 7.4.2 Seismic
7.4.2 Seismic Loading Loading in in Two
Two oror Three
Three Orthogonal
Orthogonal Directions
Directions
Revise
Revise the
the first
first paragraph
paragraph as follows:
asasfollows:
When combining the response Revise
Revise the
ofthetwofirst first paragraph
paragraph
or three orthogonal follows:
as follows:
directions the design value
When
of any quantity of interestWhen combining
combining the
the response
response of two
of two ororthree orthogonal directions the desig
desi
(displacement,
When combining
When combining the bending
the response moment,
response of twoor
shear
of two orthree
or three
three
orthogonal
axialorthogonal
orthogonal
directions
force) shall be
directions
directions
thethe desi
the des
of any
of
obtained by the 100-30 percent any quantity
quantity
combination of interest
of interest
rule as (displacement,
(displacement,
described in bending moment,
bending
LRFD-SGS moment,
Article shear or
shear
4.4. or axial
axial for
fo
of any
of any quantity
quantity of interest
of interest (displacement,
(displacement, bending
bending moment,
moment, shear
shearin or axial
orAASHTO
axial fofo
be
be obtained
obtained by
by the
the 100-30
100-30 percent
percent combination
combination rule
rule as
as described
described in AASHTO
be obtained
• Delete Eq. 7.44 and replace
be obtained
with the by following:
by the 100-30
the 100-30 percent percent combination
combination rule rule as
as described
described in in AASHTO
AASHT
Specifications
Specifications Article
Article 4.4.
4.4.
Specifications
Specifications
Lp = the maximum of [(8800ε
Article
Article
db) or 4.4.
4.4.
(0.08L + 4400εydb)] (7-44)
Delete Eq.
•••Delete Eq. 7.49 7.49y and
and replacereplace with with the
the following:
following:
Delete
• Delete
• Delete Eq. 7.49 and replace with
Eq.
Eq.the 7.49
7.49 and replace with
and replace with the following:
following:
the following:

 VVi −−VVm  
φφpp ==555 Vi i − Vmm +++222φφφyy
φ = (7.49
(7.49)
p   V −V  (7.49) (7.49
 VViii −−VVfff   y (7.49
 
• Delete Eq. 7.51 and replace
• with the following: with the
the following:
following:
•• Delete
• Delete Eq. Eq. 7.517.51 and and replacereplacewith
with the
with the following:
following:
  V ji − V jh  
φφp ==44VVjiji −−VVjhjh ++22φφy (7.51)
φ pp = 4V ji − V jf + 2φ yy (7.51
(7.51)
 VV ji −−VV jf   (7.51
(7.51
  ji jf  
The seismic retrofit of Recovery and Critical bridges shall be in accordance with the
requirements of the WSDOT BDM with consultation of Bridge Design Engineer and
4.4.1 Seismic
4.4.1 Seismic Analysis
Analysis Requirements
Requirements
4.4.1
4.4.1
Geotechnical with Seismic
Seismic
regard Analysis
Analysis
to practicability Requirements
Requirements
and cost.
The first
The first step
step inin retrofitting
retrofitting aa bridgebridge isis to
to analyze
analyze the the existing
existing structure
structure to to ide
ide
The first
The first step
step inin retrofitting
retrofitting aa bridge
bridge is is to
to analyze
analyze the the existing
existing structure
structure to to id
id
4.4.1 Seismic Analysis Requirements seismically deficient
seismically deficient elements.
elements. The The initial
initial analysis
analysis consists
consists of of generating
generating
seismically deficient
seismically deficient elements.
elements. The initial
The initial analysis
analysis consists
consists Seismicof generating
of generating
capacity/demand
capacity/demand ratios
ratios for all
for allbridges
relevant bridge components. displace
The seismic retrofit of Ordinary, Recovery and
capacity/demand
capacity/demand Critical
ratios
ratios for all
for allrelevant
relevant
relevant
bridge
shall be incomponents.
bridge
bridge accordance Seismic
components.
components. Seismicdisplacem
with
Seismic displace
displace
force demands
force demands shallManual,
shall be determined
be determined usingBDM.
using the multi-mode
the multi-mode spectral analysis
spectral analysis of
of
force
the requirements of the Seismic demands
Retrofitting
force demands shall be
shall Section determined
and
be determined WSDOT using
using the multi-mode
For
the multi-mode Ordinary spectral analysis oo
analysis
spectral requireme
Retrofitting Manual Section 5.4.2.2
5.4.2.2 (as
(as a minimum). Prescriptive
Retrofitting
bridges, the seismic analysis Retrofitting
need only
Retrofitting
Manual
Manual
be performed
Manual Sectionfor
Section 5.4.2.2 (asaaaminimum).
the upper
5.4.2.2 (as level (1,000Prescriptive
minimum).
minimum). Prescriptiverequiremen
year
Prescriptive requireme
requireme
as
as support length,
support length, shall
shall be considered
be considered mandatory
mandatory and shall
and shall be be included
included in the
in the
return period, SEE definedas asinsupport
support length,
Sectionlength, shall
4.1.1) ground
shall be
be considered
motions
considered with mandatory
a life
mandatory safety and
and shall
seismic
shall be
be included
included in th
in th
Seismic capacities
Seismic capacities shall shall be be determined
determined in in accordance
accordance with with the the requirements
requirements o
Seismic
performance level. For Recovery
Seismicand capacities shall
Critical shall
capacities Bridges, be determined
the seismic in
be determined in accordance
design required withfor the requirements
Seismic Retrofitting Manual. Displacementaccordance
Displacement capacities with
capacities shallthe
shall be
requirements
be determined
determined by by
Ordinary bridges shall be Seismic
Seismic
performed
Seismic
Retrofitting
Retrofitting
and
Retrofitting
Manual.
adequacy Manual.
Manual. of theDisplacement
existing
Displacement capacities
foundation
capacities for shall
lower
shall be
be determined bb
determined
Method D2
Method D2 –– Structure
Structure Capacity/Demand
Capacity/Demand (Pushover) (Pushover) Method Method of of Seismic
Seismic Ret Re
level seismic demand shall Method D2 –– Structure
be investigated.
Method D2 Structure
The lower Capacity/Demand
level earthquake
Capacity/Demand (Pushover)
has a return
(Pushover) Method of
Method of Seismic
Seismic Re Re
Manual
Manual Section
Section 5.6.
5.6. The
The seismic
seismic analysis
analysis need
need only
only be
be performed
performed for
for the
the up
up
Manual
period of about 210 yearsManual Section
(FEE defined
Section 5.6. The
in Section The4.1.1).
seismic analysis need
A summary of C/D only be performed
ratios performed
for all for the
the upup
(1,000 year
(1,000 year return5.6.
return period)seismic
period) ground
analysis
motions need
ground motions with aonly
with lifebe
a life seismicfor
safety seismic
safety perform
perform
elements shall be provided. (1,000
Withyear
(1,000 year return
the approval period)
return period) ground
of theground
WSDOT motions
State Bridge
motions with a
with a and life safety
life Structures, seismic
safety seismic perform perform
level.
level.
State Bridge Design and State level.Geotechnical Engineers the retrofit of foundation elements
level.
with seismic deficiencies could be
4.4.2 Seismic
4.4.2 Seismic deferredDesign
Retrofit to the Seismic Retrofit Program.
4.4.2 SeismicRetrofit
4.4.2 Seismic RetrofitDesign
Retrofit Design
Design
The first step in retrofitting
Oncea bridge is to analyze
seismically deficient thebridge
existing structure
elements to identify
have been identified,
identified, appropriate
appropriate
Once
OnceTheseismically
seismically deficient
deficient bridge
bridge elements
elements have
have been
been identified,
identified, appropriate
appropriat
Once
seismically deficient elements.
measures seismically
initial
shall be deficient
analysis
selected bridge
consists
and ofelements
generating
designed. Tablehave been
capacity/demand
1-11, Chapters 8, 9, 10,
10, 11,
11, aa
measures
measures shall be
shall be be selected
selected and designed.
and designed.
designed. Table
Table 1-11, Chapters
1-11, Chapters
Chapters 8, 9,
8, 9,
9, 10,
10, 11,
11, a
measures
ratios for all relevant bridge components.
Appendices D shall
D thru selected
Seismic
thru FF of of the and
displacement
the Seismic and
Seismic Retrofitting Table
force
Retrofitting Manual 1-11,
demands
Manual shall shall
shall be 8,
be used
used inin sele
sele
Appendices
Appendices D thru F of the Seismic Retrofitting Manual shall be used in sel
Appendices
be determined using the multi-mode
designing the Dseismic
thru Fanalysis
spectral of the Seismic
retrofit ofmeasures.
SectionRetrofitting
5.4.2.2
The (atManual
WSDOT a minimum).
Bridgeshallandbe used in sele
Structure O
designing
designing the seismic
the seismic
seismic retrofit
retrofit measures.
measures. The WSDOT
The aWSDOT
WSDOT Bridge
Bridge and Structure
StructureO
and Structure
designing
Prescriptive requirements,Seismic the
such asSpecialist
support length,retrofit
will be shall measures.
be consultedbe considered
consulted in in the The demand
the selection
selection and Bridge
and
and design
design ofandof the
the
Seismic
Seismic Specialist
Specialist will
will bebeshall
consulted in the
the selection
selection and design
design of of the
the
Seismic
shall be included in the analysis.
retrofit Specialist
Seismic
measures. will
capacities consulted in
be determined and
in accordance
retrofit
retrofit measures.
measures.
with the requirements of the retrofit measures.
Seismic Retrofitting Manual. Displacement capacities shall
be determined by the Method D2 – Structure Capacity/Demand (Pushover) Method of
Section 5.6.
Page 4-26 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22
September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

4.4.2 Seismic Retrofit Design

Once seismically deficient bridge elements have been identified, appropriate retrofit
measures shall be selected and designed. Table 1‑11, Chapters 8, 9, 10, 11, and
Appendices D thru F of the Seismic Retrofitting Manual shall be used in selecting and
designing the seismic retrofit measures. The WSDOT Bridge and Structure Office Seismic
Specialist will be consulted in the selection and design of the retrofit measures.

4.4.3 Computer Analysis Verification

The computer results will be verified to ensure accuracy and correctness. The designer
should use the following procedures for model verification:
• Using graphics to check the orientation of all nodes, members, supports, joint, and
member releases. Make sure that all the structural components and connections
correctly model the actual structure.
• Check dead load reactions with hand calculations. The difference should be less than
5 percent.
• Calculate fundamental and subsequent modes by hand and compare results with
computer results.
• Check the mode shapes and verify that structure movements are reasonable.
• Increase the number of modes to obtain 90 percent or more mass participation
in each direction. GTSTRUDL/SAP2000 directly calculates the percentage of
mass participation.
• Check the distribution of lateral forces. Are they consistent with column stiffness?
Do small changes in stiffness of certain columns give predictable results?

4.4.4 Earthquake Restrainers

Longitudinal restrainers shall be high strength steel rods conform to ASTM F 1554
Grade 105, including Supplement Requirements S2, S3 and S5. Nuts, and couplers if
required, shall conform to ASTM A 563 Grade DH. Washers shall conform to AASHTO
M 293. High strength steel rods and associated couplers, nuts and washers shall be
galvanized after fabrication in accordance with AASHTO M 232 or epoxy coated. The
length of longitudinal restrainers shall be less than 24 feet.

4.4.5 Isolation Bearings

Isolation bearings may be used for seismic retrofit projects to reduce the demands
through modification of the dynamic properties of the bridge as a viable alternative
to strengthening weak elements of non-ductile bridge substructure members of
existing bridge. Use of isolation bearings needs the approval of WSDOT State Bridge
Design Engineer. Isolation bearings shall be designed per the requirements specified in
Section 9.3.

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-27

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

4.5 Seismic Design Requirements for Retaining Walls and Buried

Structure
4.5.1 Seismic Design of Retaining Walls
All retaining walls shall include seismic design load combinations. The design acceleration
for retaining walls shall be determined in accordance with the LRFD-SGS. Once the design
acceleration is determined, the designer shall follow the applicable design specification
requirements listed in Appendix 8.1-A1:

Exceptions to the cases described in Appendix 8.1-A1 may occur with approval
from the WSDOT State Bridge Design Engineer and/or the WSDOT State
Geotechnical Engineer.

4.5.2 Seismic Design of Buried Structure

Buried structures shall be designed for seismic effects in accordance with the
requirements in Section 8.3.3.E.

Page 4-28 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023
Seismic Design and Retrofit Chapter 4

4.99 References
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 9th Edition, 2020
AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design, 2nd Edition, 2011
AASHTO Guide Specifications for Seismic Isolation Design, 3rd Edition, 2010
Caltrans Bridge Design Aids 14 4 Joint Shear Modeling Guidelines for Existing Structures,
California Department of Transportation, August 2008
FHWA Seismic Retrofitting Manual for Highway Structures: Part 1 Bridges, Publication No.
FHWA-HRT-06-032, January 2006
McLean, D.I. and Smith, C.L., Noncontact Lap Splices in Bridge Column-Shaft Connections,
Report Number WA-RD 417.1, Washington State University
WSDOT Geotechnical Design Manual M 46-03, Environmental and Engineering Program,
Geotechnical Services, Washington State Department of Transportation

WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22 Page 4-29

September 2023
Chapter 4 Seismic Design and Retrofit

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 4-30 WSDOT Bridge Design Manual M 23-50.22

September 2023