Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Analysis of large segmentally constructed cantilever bridges is a complex task. It runs through all subsystems in the construction history, keeping track of time, dead weight, prestressing, traveling formwork, temporary columns, jacking of cantilevers, etc., and then finally through the service life of the bridge. This complexity makes results very hard to judge by hand, especially the time dependent behavior, and thus, the designer becomes to a very large extent dependent on the computer program. In this paper, results obtained by various software are compared for two large segmentally constructed bridges. The comparisons revealed unacceptably large differences in long-term girder displacements and column forces. The computer program DARC, that generally gave the largest time dependent effects, was however unable to track the magnitude of measured deflections beyond 15 years for a third bridge, but agreed well with rebar strain recordings over a limited period of 2.5 years in the columns of one of the others. This investigation raises three interrelated issues: (1) improved benchmark testing of this kind of software; (2) calibration of code models for creep and shrinkage to outdoor environment and loading conditions; and (3) need for instrumentation and monitoring of segmentally constructed bridges.

Keywords

reinforced concrete prestressing creep shrinkage aging relaxation segmental bridge construction

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bažant

Hubler

. Pervasiveness of excessive segmental bridge deflections: wake-up call for creep. ACI Struct J 2011; 108(6): 766–774.

CEN . Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures. Part 1-1: general rules and rules for buildings (EN 1992-1-1). Brussels, Belgium: European Committee for Standardization, 2004.

CEB . CEB-FIP model code 1990. Lausanne, Switzerland: Euro-International Committee for Concrete, 1993.

ACI Committee 209 . Guide for modelling and calculating shrinkage and creep in hardened concrete. Michigan, USA: American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2008. Report ACI 209.2R-08.

Bažant

Baweja

. Creep and shrinkage prediction model for analysis and design of concrete structures: model B3. In: Al-Manaseer

(ed). Adam Neville Symp.: Creep and Shrinkage – Structural Design Effects, (Proc.). Michigan, USA: American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2000, pp. 1–83.

Gardner

Lockman

. Design provisions for drying shrinkage and creep of normal-strength concrete. ACI Mater J 2001; 98(2): 159–167. DOI: 10.14359/10199.

AASHTO . LRFD bridge design specification. 4th ed. Washington, DC, USA: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2007.

Granata

Margiotta

Arici

. 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 2013; 18(12): 1281–1297. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000483.

Giaccu

Solinas

Briseghella

, et al. Time-dependent analysis of precast segmental bridges. Int J Concr Struct Mater 2021; 15: 13. DOI: 10.1186/s40069-020-00445-6.

10.

FIB . Model code for concrete structures 2010. Lausanne, Switzerland: International Federation for Structural Concrete, 2013.

11.

Fanourakis

. Validation of the FIB 2010 and RILEM B4 models for predicting creep in concrete. Architecture, Civil Engineering, Environment 2017; 10(3): 95–101. DOI: 10.21307/acee-2017-037.

12.

Bažant

. (chair). “RILEM draft recommendation: TC-242-MDC multi-decade creep and shrinkage of concrete: material model and structural analysis. Model B4 for creep, drying shrinkage and autogenous shrinkage of normal and high-strength concretes with multi-decade applicability”. Mater Struct 2015; 48(4): 753–770. DOI: 10.1617/s11527-014-0485-2.

13.

Teigen

. Nonlinear analysis of concrete structures based on a 3D shear-beam element formulation. Dr.Philos. thesis, Univ. of Oslo, Norway 1994. https://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-37298

14.

Teigen

. Prestressed box girder bridge strengthened by an internal tubular arch. J Bridge Eng 2018; 23. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001212.

15.

Müller

Hilsdorf

. Evaluation of the time dependent behavior of concrete. Paris: Information Bulletin 199, Euro-International Committee for Concrete (CEB), 1990.

16.

Teigen

. DARC user guide. ResearchGate, 2012. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23151.96162.

17.

SN . Design of concrete structures. Design- and detailing rules (NS 3473). Oslo, Norway: Standards Norway, 2003.

Software comparisons and measurements of segmentally constructed bridges

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References