Assessment of Transverse Deck Cracking in Bridges during Staged Construction
Publication: Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities
Volume 38, Issue 2
Abstract
Staged construction is often used for bridges, in which a portion of a bridge remains open to traffic while another portion is closed for construction. Although staged construction reduces delays and the need for detours, subjecting the partially constructed bridge to dead and vehicular live loading can lead to damage and subsequent deterioration, including compromised longitudinal construction joints and transverse deck cracking. Despite past studies and best practices, transverse cracking persists and is often observed more on one side of the deck during construction, and no definitive explanation has been provided. As such, the objective of this study is to present a mechanics-based method for assessing transverse deck cracking in bridges during staged construction. Demonstrated on two bridges that underwent staged construction, the assessment method provides insights into the persistence of the issue and provides a mechanics-based explanation for observations of transverse cracking sometimes being observed only on one side of the bridge. The method, based on the superposition of strains, considers the sequence of steps in the construction process and estimates strain demands in the concrete decks at each stage, considering variations of the structural configuration, applied loads, and time-dependent behaviors. The results of the assessment agree with finite-element analysis results while requiring less model development and computational effort. The estimated strain history is then used to assess whether transverse cracking occurs by comparing the demand to the concrete’s tensile strength in time. The method is demonstrated on a new bridge constructed in stages and an existing bridge that underwent rehabilitation via staged construction. The results of the demonstrations suggest the importance of evaluating both the open and closed portions of bridge decks at each stage, as each portion has different structural and mechanical properties and loading demands. The assessment results are qualitatively validated based upon information from postconstruction bridge inspections. Furthermore, the method can be used to gain insight into mitigating transverse deck cracking and support decision-making for bridge construction practices.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data, models, or code that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
The research described in this paper was supported by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation under Contract no. 511601 PSU WO 018. The contents of this paper reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the FHWA or the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at the time of publication. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
References
AASHTO. 2017. LRFD bridge design specifications. 8th ed. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2013. Guide for widening highway bridges. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.
Adanur, S., M. Günaydin, A. C. Altunişik, and B. Sevim. 2012. “Construction stage analysis of humber suspension bridge.” Appl. Math. Modell. 36 (11): 5492–5505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2012.01.011.
Aktan, H. M., and U. Attanayake. 2020. Bridge structural analyses for staged construction and constructability reviews. Lansing, MI: Michigan Department of Transportation Research Administration.
Ates, S. 2011. “Numerical modelling of continuous concrete box girder bridges considering construction stages.” Appl. Math. Modell. 35 (8): 3809–3820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2011.02.016.
Atmaca, B., and S. Ates. 2012. “Construction stage analysis of three-dimensional cable-stayed bridges.” Steel Compos. Struct. 12 (5): 413–426. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2012.12.5.413.
Chai, Y., and H. Hung. 2016. “Waiting period for closure pours in bridge widening or staged construction.” J. Bridge Eng. 21 (5): 04016006. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000875.
Cho, T., and T. S. Kim. 2008. “Probabilistic risk assessment for the construction phases of a bridge construction based on finite element analysis.” Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 44 (6–7): 383–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.finel.2007.12.004.
Computers and Structures. 2015. CSI analysis reference manual for sap2000®, etabs®, safe®, and csibridge®. Athens, Greece: Computers and Structures Inc.
Cruz, P., A. Mari, and P. Roca. 1998. “Nonlinear time-dependent analysis of segmentally constructed structures.” J. Struct. Eng. 124 (3): 278–287. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1998)124:3(278).
Deaver, R. W. 1982. Bridge widening study. Forest Park, GA: Georgia DOT, Office of Materials and Research.
Fu, C. C., G. Zhao, Y. Ye, and F. Zhang. 2015. Serviceability-related issues for bridge live load deflection and construction closure pours. College Park, MD: Maryland State Highway Administration.
Furr, H. L., and F. H. Fouad. 1981. Bridge slab concrete placed adjacent to moving live loads. College Station, TX: Texas A&M Univ.
Guo, J., K. Deng, M. He, C. Zhao, and W. Li. 2017. “Experimental study on the construction stages of an RC closure pour in bridge widening.” J. Bridge Eng. 22 (12): 06017007. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001155.
Hadidi, R., and M. A. Saadeghvaziri. 2005. “Transverse cracking of concrete bridge decks: State-of-the-art.” J. Bridge Eng. 10 (5): 503–510. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2005)10:5(503).
Harsh, S., and D. Darwin. 1986. “Traffic-induced vibrations and bridge deck repairs.” Concr. Int. 8 (5): 36–42.
Issa, M. A. 1999. “Investigation of cracking in concrete bridge decks at early ages.” J. Bridge Eng. 4 (2): 116–124. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(1999)4:2(116).
Manning, D. G. 1981. “Effects of traffic-induced vibrations on bridge-deck repairs.” In NCHRP synthesis highway practice, 86. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
Nassif, H., N. Suksawang, R. Lewis, and H. Najm. 2010. Bridge deck cracking and composite action analyses. Trenton, NJ: New Jersey DOT.
Oehler, L. T., and G. R. Cudney. 1966. Deck rippling on the i-75 rouge river bridge-second progress rep. Lansing, MI: Michigan Department of State Highways.
Saadeghvaziri, M. A., and R. Hadidi. 2002. Cause and control of transverse cracking in concrete bridge decks. Newark, NJ: New Jersey Institute of Technology.
Su, D., H. Nassif, and Y. Xia. 2018. “Optimization of deck construction staging for multiple-span continuous steel girder bridge.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 32 (1): 04017124. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0001073.
Videla, C., D. J. Carreira, and N. Garner. 2008. Guide for modeling and calculating shrinkage and creep in hardened concrete. Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute.
Weatherer, P. J., and B. D. Hedegaard. 2019. “Field evaluation of staged concrete bridge deck pours adjacent to live traffic.” J. Bridge Eng. 24 (4): 04019006. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001367.
Zhang, R., A. Radlinska, and G. Warn. 2022. Serviceability of staged bridges. Harrisburg, PA: Bureau of Planning and Research Commonwealth.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities
Volume 38 • Issue 2 • April 2024
Copyright
© 2024 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jul 27, 2023
Accepted: Oct 20, 2023
Published online: Jan 11, 2024
Published in print: Apr 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Jun 11, 2024
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.