Serviceability and Ultimate Safety Checks of Segmental Concrete Bridges through and Interaction Domains
Publication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 20, Issue 8
Abstract
In current engineering practice, safety checks on serviceability and determinations of ultimate limit states of segmental bridges built by cantilevering are generally performed, either considering separately the contributions of axial force , bending moment , and shear force , or considering the interaction effects through approximate expressions supplied by building codes. During construction stages and service life, the interaction between internal forces can be of fundamental importance in establishing the actual degree of structural safety and, for this reason, a different philosophy for performing checks in segmental bridges is proposed in this paper, plotting and interaction domains for cracking, construction stages, and serviceability (elastic domains) as well as interaction domains for ultimate limit states (failure domains). Delayed deformations as a result of creep are considered, as are bonded and unbonded prestressing. A model is developed for plotting bending-shear domains at the ultimate limit state, underlining the strength reduction that occurs in concrete sections with external prestressing versus beams with full internal prestressing. A numerical application on an actual segmental bridge built by cantilevering was performed to show the proposed methodology, based entirely on strength domains, for safety checks. The load and stress paths in the construction stages are highlighted by considering the effects of creep in concrete, whereas bending-shear interaction is evaluated in the two cases of fully bonded prestressing and partially unbonded prestressing. The results show that safety checks which are performed based on approximate assumptions and expressions that do not explicitly consider the interaction effects can lead to unsafe evaluations, and it also shows that the proposed methodology allows engineers to take into account simultaneously any aspect related to cross-sectional strength on serviceability and ultimate limit states.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
American Concrete Institute (ACI). (2008). “Guide for modeling and calculating shrinkage and creep in hardened concrete.” ACI 209.2R08, Detroit.
American Concrete Institute (ACI). (2011). “Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary.” ACI 318-11, Detroit.
American Concrete Institute (ACI). (2012). “Time dependent effects in concrete structures.” ACI 209.3RXX, Detroit.
Arici, M., and Granata, M. F. (2013). “Conceptual design of prestressed slab bridges through one-way flexural load balancing.” Struct. Eng. Mech., 48(5), 615–642.
Arici, M., Granata, M. F., and Recupero, A. (2011). “The influence of time-dependent phenomena in segmental construction of concrete cable-stayed bridges.” Bridge Struct., 7(4), 125–137.
Bairan Garcia, J. M., and Marì Bernat, A. R. (2006a). “Coupled model for the non-linear analysis of anisotropic sections subjected to general 3D loading. Part 1: Theoretical formulation.” Comput. Struct., 84(31–32), 2254–2263.
Bairan Garcia, J. M., and Marì Bernat, A. R. (2006b). “Coupled model for the nonlinear analysis of sections made of anisotropic materials, subjected to general 3D loading. Part 2: Implementation and validation.” Comput. Struct., 84(31–32), 2264–2276.
Bairan Garcia, J. M., and Marì Bernat, A. R. (2007). “Shear-bending-torsion interaction in structural concrete members: A nonlinear coupled sectional approach.” Arch. Comput. Methods Eng., 14(3), 249–278.
Bertagnoli, G., and Mancini, G. (2009). “Failure analysis of hollow-core slabs tested in shear.” Struct. Concr., 10(3), 139–152.
Chiorino, M. A. (2005). “A rational approach to the analysis of creep structural effects.” Shrinkage and creep of concrete, N. J. Gardner and W. J. Weiss, eds., American Concrete Institute (ACI), Detroit, 107–141.
Corres-Peiretti, H. (2009). “Editorial: Conceptual design. The only way to create sound structural concrete solutions.” Struct. Concr., 10(3), 107–108.
European Committee for Standardization (CEN). (2004). “Design of concrete structures, part 2-1.” EN 1992.2-1, Brussels, Belgium.
European Committee for Standardization (CEN). (2005). “Design of concrete structures, part 1.1.” Eurocode 2, Brussels, Belgium.
Fanti, G., and Mancini, G. (1994). “Shear-prestressing interaction in ultimate limit state design.” Developments in short and medium span bridge engineering, Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Montreal.
Granata, M. F., and Arici, M. (2013). “Serviceability of segmental concrete arch-frame bridges built by cantilevering.” Bridge Struct., 9(1), 21–36.
Granata, M. F., Margiotta, P., and Arici, M. (2013a). “Simplified procedure for evaluating the effects of creep and shrinkage on prestressed concrete girder bridges and the application of European and North American prediction models.” J. Bridge Eng., 1281–1297.
Granata, M. F., Margiotta, P., Recupero, A., and Arici, M. (2013b). “Partial elastic scheme method in cantilever construction of concrete arch bridges.” J. Bridge Eng., 663–672.
Hedjazi, S., Rahai, A., and Sennah, K. (2007). “Evaluation of creep effects on the time-dependent deflections and stresses in prestressed concrete bridges.” Bridge Struct., 3(2), 119–132.
Huang, Z., and Liu, X. L. (2006). “Modified skew bending model for segmental bridge with unbonded tendons.” J. Bridge Eng., 59–63.
International Federation for Structural Concrete (fib). (2001). “Durability of post-tensioning tendons.” Tech. Rep. 15, Lausanne, Switzerland.
International Federation for Structural Concrete (fib). (2012). fib model code for concrete structures 2010, Vols. 1 and 2, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Krishnamurthy, N. (1983). “Magnel diagrams for prestressed concrete beams.” J. Struct. Eng., 2761–2769.
Magnel, G. (1954). Prestressed concrete, McGraw Hill, New York.
Mathivat, J. (1979). Incremental construction of prestressed-concrete bridges, Groupe Eyrolles, Paris.
Naaman, A. E., Burns, N., French, C., Gamble, W. L., and Mattock, A. H. (2002). “Stresses in unbonded prestressing tendons at ultimate: Recommendation.” ACI Struct. J., 99(4), 518–529.
Ramos, G., and Aparicio, A. C. (1996). “Ultimate analysis of monolithic and segmental externally prestressed concrete bridges.” J. Bridge Eng., 10–17.
Recupero, A., D’Aveni, A., and Ghersi, A. (2003). “N-M-V interaction domains for box and I-shaped reinforced concrete members.” ACI Struct. J., 100(1), 113–119.
Recupero, A., D’Aveni, A., and Ghersi, A. (2005). “Bending moment–shear force interaction domains for prestressed concrete beams.” J. Struct. Eng., 1413–1421.
Recupero, A., and Granata, M. F. (2013). “Bending-shear interaction domains for externally prestressed concrete girders.” Advances Civil Engineering, Vol. 2013, 580646.
Rossi, P. P., and Recupero, A. (2013). “Ultimate strength of reinforced concrete circular members subjected to axial force, bending moment, and shear force.” J. Struct. Eng., 915–928.
Russo, G., Zingone, G., and Puleri, G. (1991). “Flexure-shear interaction model for longitudinally reinforced beams.” ACI Struct. J., 88(1), 60–68.
Turmo, J., Ramos, G., and Aparicio, A. C. (2006). “FEM modelling of unbonded post-tensioned segmental beams with dry joints.” Eng. Struct., 28(13), 1852–1863.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 20 • Issue 8 • August 2015
Copyright
© 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jan 29, 2014
Accepted: Jul 30, 2014
Published online: Aug 27, 2014
Published in print: Aug 1, 2015
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.