Seismic strengthening is the only solution minimize the risk of existing bridges against damage during an earthquake vulnerable. This study, unlike many of the case studies, investigates the vulnerability of arched bridges with a box section frame in the construction and retrofitting of probabilistic deals. As well as Viaduct, because of the way that it needs to pass the Curved horizontal with a radius and height of uniform and non-uniform as well. In such a case, although it may be relatively uniform response of deck structures, required ductility of columns, each column will vary. The effect of the curvature radius with a base height difference of the curved geometry of horizontal bridges adds to the complexity of horizontal seismic behavior of Curved Box bridges. Evaluation of the seismic vulnerability of bridges that span concrete Curve with a deck box strengthening of reinforced concrete is evaluated in this study. In order to prepare the necessary tools for designing, planning, and reducing the vulnerability of bridges in strategic routes and maximum use of resources in the retrofit of bridges, providing a context for the evaluation of the seismic vulnerability of bridges has been presented. Therefore, seismic demand models for multi-span Curved bridge deck box with the same base and altitude circular base of a column and various height are produced. The main parameters of the model require different radius and height difference Curved bridge deck is horizontal. Thus, a class-arch bridge in California constructed after 1970, selected three-dimensional finite element analysis models of bridges, the nonlinear time history analysis is created. The other five bridges with the radius of curvature of the half, one and a half times, twice, three times and ten times of the original sample is modeled. While job engagement had a negative and causal correlation with intention to quit (r = -0.32).

Alavi, B., & Krawinkler, H. (2000). Consideration of Near-Fault Ground Motion Effects in Seismic Design. 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No: 2665.

Chai, Y. H., Priestley, M. N., & Seible, F. (1991). Seismic Retrofit of Circular Bridge Columns for Enhanced Flexural Performance. ACI Structural Journal (American Concrete Institute), 88(5), 572–584.

Computers and Structures, Inc. (2011). CSi Bridge, version 2014, Integrated 3D Bridge design Software. Berkeley, CA.

Dukes, J. D. (2013). Application of bridge specific fragility analysis in the seismic design process of bridges in California (Ph.D. Dissertation), Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.

FHWA (1995). Seismic Retrofitting Manual for Highway Bridges, Vol. FHWA-RD-94-052. Office of Engineering and Highway Operations R and D, McLean, 16 edition.

FHWA (2006). Seismic Retrofitting Manual for Highway Structures: Part 1 – Bridges. Report No. FHWARD (MCEER-06-xxxx), Federal Highway Administration.

Padgett, J. E., & DesRoches, R. (2008). Methodology for the development of analytical fragility curves for retrofitted bridges. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn., 37, 1157–1174. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.801

Priestley, M. J. N., Seible, F., & Calvi, G. M. (1996). Seismic Design and Retrofit of Bridges. John Wiley and Sons, New York. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470172858

Ramanathan, N. K. (2012). Next generation seismic fragility curves for California bridges incorporating the evolution in seismic design philosophy (Ph.D. thesis), Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.

Wright, T., DesRoches, R., & Padgett, J. E. (2011). Bridge Seismic Retrofitting Practices in the Central and Southeastern United States. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 16(1), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000128