In this paper, the dynamic responses of a large-scale multiple-support road viaduct to mining-induced seismic events registered in two regions of mining activity were compared. The regions differ in geological structure, which results in discrepancies in the dominant frequency content. Spatial variation of ground motion causing the kinematic excitation non-uniformity was accounted for in the dynamic analyses of this large-scale structure. Non-uniform mining-induced kinematic excitation models were proposed, with respect to the specificity of mining origin quakes. The dynamic performance of the viaduct was determined using three different methods of calculation: the time history analysis, the response spectrum analysis, and the multiple support response spectrum analysis. Both the uniform and non-uniform kinematic excitation models were adopted for the dynamic performance assessment. The research revealed that the dynamic response of some members of the structure, determined using the non-uniform excitation model, was significantly greater than that obtained for the uniform one. Hence, in the dynamic analysis of multiple-support structures under mining-induced events, the effect of spatial variation of ground motion should be considered. The study pointed out that the commonly used response spectrum analysis may lead to the underestimation of the dynamic response of large-scale multiple-support structures. Instead, the multiple support response spectrum method, which takes into account the non-uniformity of ground motion, is recommended as a conservative approximation. This method provides a safe upper estimation of the full-dynamic analysis results of large-scale structures under mining-induced tremors. Finally, the research indicated that the dynamic performance of a structure strongly depends on the frequency range attributed to a specific mining region. The dynamic performance of identical engineering structures under tremors of similar maximal amplitudes may differ significantly due to discrepancies in frequency contents of shocks occurring in various mining regions.

In this paper, the seismic assessments of two footbridges, i.e., a single-span steel frame footbridge and a three-span cable-stayed structure, to the spatial variation of earthquake ground motion (SVEGM) are presented. A model of nonuniform kinematic excitation was used for the dynamic analyses of the footbridges. The influence of SVEGM on the dynamic performance of structures was assessed on both experimental and numerical ways. The comprehensive tests were planned and carried out on both structures. The investigation was divided into two parts: in situ experiment and numerical analyses. The first experimental part served for the validation of both the finite element (FE) modal models of structures and the theoretical model of nonuniform excitation as well as the appropriateness of the FE procedures used for dynamic analyses. First, the modal properties were validated. The differences between the numerical and the experimental natural frequencies, obtained using the operational modal analysis, were less than 10%. The comparison of the experimental and numerical mode shapes also proved a good agreement since the modal assurance criterion values were satisfactory for both structures. Secondly, nonuniform kinematic excitation was experimentally imposed using vibroseis tests. The apparent wave velocities, evaluated from the cross-correlation functions of the acceleration-time histories registered at two consecutive structures supports, equaled 203 and 214 m/s for both structures, respectively. Also, the coherence functions proved the similarity of the signals, especially for the frequency range 5 to 15 Hz. Then, artificial kinematic excitation was generated on the basis of the adopted model of nonuniform excitation. The obtained power spectral density functions of acceleration-time histories registered at all supports as well as the cross-spectral density functions between registered and artificial acceleration-time histories confirmed the strong similarity of the measured and artificial signals. Finally, the experimental and numerical assessments of the footbridges performance under the known dynamic excitation generated by the vibroseis were carried out. The FE models and procedures were positively validated by linking full-scale tests and numerical calculations. In the numerical part of the research, seismic analyses of the footbridges were conducted. The dynamic responses of structures to a representative seismic shock were calculated. Both the uniform and nonuniform models of excitation were applied to demonstrate and quantify the influence of SVEGM on the seismic assessment of footbridges. It occurred that SVEGM may generate non-conservative results in comparison with classic uniform seismic excitation. For the stiff steel frame footbridge the maximum dynamic response was obtained for the model of nonuniform excitation with the lowest wave velocity. Especially zones located closely to stiff frame nodes were significantly more disturbed. For the flexible cable-stayed footbridge, in case of nonuniform excitation, the dynamic response was enhanced only at the points located in the extreme spans and in the midspan closely to the pillars.

The aim of this paper was to investigate the dynamic response of a concrete structure subjected to a mainshock–aftershock seismic sequence. In the dynamic analysis, three components of the registered mainshock and aftershock were taken into account. The peak ground accelerations of about 0.5 g were assumed for both shocks. A one-storey shed was modelled with the ABAQUS software to represent a large concrete structure under the repeated earthquakes. For proper characterization of concrete structure behaviour under the sequence of shocks, a concrete damage plasticity model was assumed as a constitutive model of concrete. The obtained results indicate that aftershocks can have considerable effect on dynamic behaviour of concrete structures in terms of enlarging zones affected by irreversible strains or additional damage evolution. The analysis revealed that aftershocks, which are usually not as strong as mainshocks, may result even in total loss of concrete material strength while performing in mainshock–aftershock seismic sequences.