performance of integral bridge with various span...

PERFORMANCE OF INTEGRAL BRIDGE WITH VARIOUS SPAN

LENGTHS

TUAN KHUSAIRRY BIN TUAN ABDUL MANAF

A project report submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the award of the degree of

Master of Engineering ( Civil – Structure )

Faculty of Civil Engineering

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

JANUARY 2014

iii

To my beloved wife, family, lecturers and friends

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I am so grateful towards ALLAH S.W.T that bestowed me the

strength and opportunity to finish my report. In the process of preparing and

completing this report, I was in contact either directly or indirectly with many

people, academicians and supplier. They have contributed towards my understanding

and thought.

In particular, I wish to express my greatest appreciation to my supervisor,

A.P. Dr. Arizu Bin Sulaiman for his encouragement, guidance, critics and

motivations.

At the same moment, I am grateful to all my family members for their

support and encouragement. My sincere appreciations also to my beloved wife,

Zalina Binti Mohamed Fauzi and not forgetting to all my children, Mohamad Arfan,

Mardhiatul Afzan, Maizatul Aqilah and Marissa Amanda.

I also indebted to Faculty of Civil Engineering, University Technology

Malaysia for giving me an opportunity to gain the experience, widen my knowledge,

and the facilities provided to me had simplified my work throughout the study

period.

I hope my findings in the study will expand the knowledge in this field and

contribute to all of us in future.

v

ABSTRACT

An integral bridge may be defined as having no expansion joints or sliding

bearings, the deck is continuous across the length of the bridge. Among the

advantages of this type of bridge is reducing the cost of maintenance and bringing

comfort to road users as there is no connection between the superstructure and

substructure. However, this type of bridge is quite different in comparison to the

conventional bridge in terms of the analysis and design. The aim of this study is to

examine the performance, with respect to the terms of reference of the PWD Bridge

Unit of integral bridges in excess of 60 m span length. This study is also intended to

investigate and make a comparison between integral bridges with various span

lengths in terms of the performance particularly for the reactions resulting from the

applied load. A series of integral bridges with different span configurations and

lengths have been designed and analyzed using STAAD Pro. The results show that

when the span increases, the values of hogging moments at connection between

beam and pier increase significantly. From the analysis and design that have been

made, it can be concluded that for integral bridges with lengths more than 70 m (for

example, configuration of bridge of 20m + 40m + 20m), the bridge can be designed

as an integral bridge but the thickness of the deck slab should be increased in order to

sustain the resulting negative hogging moment on the connections between the

beams and piers. However, the cost incurred due to increasing the thickness of the

deck slab should be calculated in order to assess whether a bridge should designed as

an integral bridge or conventional bridge.

vi

ABSTRAK

Jambatan integral boleh ditakrifkan sebagai tidak mempunyai sendi

pengembangan atau gelongsor galas, yang mana pada bahagian papaknya adalah

bersambung terus dari bahagian rentang kepada bahagian sub-struktur. Antara

kelebihan jambatan jenis ini adalah dapat mengurangkan kos penyelenggaraan dan

memberi keselesaan kepada pengguna jalan raya kerana tiada penyambungan antara

sub-struktur dan struktur atas. Walaubagaimanapun, jambatan jenis ini adalah amat

berbeza berbanding dengan jambatan konvensional dari segi analisis dan reka

bentuk. Tujuan kajian adalah untuk mengkaji prestasi jambatan dengan merujuk

kepada terma rujukan Bahagian Jambatan JKR Malaysia, bagi mengkaji jambatan

integral yang melebihi 60 m panjang rentang. Kajian ini juga bertujuan untuk

menyiasat dan membuat perbandingan di antara jambatan integral dengan pelbagai

panjang rentang dari segi prestasi terutamanya bagi tindak balas yang terhasil

daripada beban kenaan. Bagi tujuan tersebut, beberapa model jambatan integral

dengan panjang dan konfigurasi rentang yang berbeza telah direka bentuk dan

dianalisis dengan menggunakan perisian STAAD Pro. Keputusan yang diperolehi

menunjukkan bahawa apabila span bertambah, nilai-nilai momen negatif pada

sambungan antara rasuk dan tiang sambut meningkat dengan ketara. Daripada

analisis dan reka bentuk yang telah dibuat, dapat dibuat kesimpulan bahawa untuk

jambatan integral dengan panjang lebih daripada 70 m (sebagai contoh, konfigurasi

jambatan 20m + 40m + 20m ), ianya boleh direka bentuk sebagai jambatan integral

tetapi ketebalan papak perlu ditambah bagi membolehkannya mengambil momen

negatif yang terhasil pada sambungan antara rasuk dan tiang sambut.

Walaubagaimanapun, perbandingan kos yang terhasil disebabkan oleh pertambahan

ketebalan papak perlu dibuat bagi menilai samada sesuatu jambatan itu perlu direka

bentuk sebagai jambatan integral atau jambatan konvensional.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER CONTENT PAGE

TITLE i

DECLARATION ii

DEDICATIONS iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iv

ABSTRACT v

ABSTRAK vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

LIST OF TABLES x

LIST OF FIGURES xii

LIST OF SYMBOLS xvii

LIST OF APPENDICES xix

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Aim and Objectives 3

1.3 Problem Statement 4

1.4 The Scope of the Study 5

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 6

2.1 Introduction 6

2.2 Design Bridge System 7

2.2.1 Simply Supported/Semi Integral Bridge 9

2.2.2 Integral Bridge 10

viii

2.3 Sequence of Construction for Integral Bridge 12

2.4 Design Issues 14

2.4.1 Continuity and Abutment Fixity 14

2.4.2 Abutment Piles 15

2.4.3 Skew 16

2.5 Design Principle and Approach 17

2.5.1 Limit State Design 17

2.5.2 Ultimate Limit State 18

2.5.3 Serviceability Limit State 19

2.5.4 Design Life 19

2.6 Bridge Loading 20

2.6.1 Dead and Superimposed Dead Loading 22

2.6.2 Imposed Traffic loading 23

2.6.3 Imposed Loading Due to Road Traffic 24

2.6.4 Thermal Loading 25

2.7 Load Combinations (Load Cases) 25

2.7.1 Load Combinations Based to the BD37/01 27

3 METHODOLOGY 31

3.1 Introduction 31

3.2 Problem Identification 33

3.3 Structural Model and Construction Stages 33

3.3.1 Construction Sequence 35

3.4 Integral Bridge Modeling 38

3.5 Perform Analysis 41

3.6 Comparison result between four Integral Bridge Models

With Various Span Lengths and Design Verification 41

3.7 Expected Findings 41

4 ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 43

4.1 Introduction 43

4.2 Bridge Modeling 43

4.2.1 Geometry Definition 46

4.2.2 “General” Definition 47

4.2.3 Section Properties of the Elements 48

ix

4.2.4 Support General 51

4.2.5 Load Consideration 54

4.2.6 Lateral Earth Pressure 60

4.3 Perform Analysis 63

4.3.1 Comparison Result between Four Integral

Bridge Models with Various Span Lengths 67

4.4 Integral Bridge Design 69

4.5 Adaptation of Real Integral Bridge Design 79

5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 82

5.1 Introduction 82

5.2 Analysis of Bridge Models 83

5.2.1 Analysis of Bridge Models using STAAD Pro 83

5.3 Result Obtained From the Analysis 85

5.3.1 Result of Bridge Model no. 1 85




5.4 Discussion 108

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION 111

5.1 Conclusion 111

5.2 Recommendation 113

REFERENCES 114

APPENDICES 116

x

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

5.1 The values of bending moment, shear force and displacement

at point 1 (Abutment) – Bridge model no. 1

85



86


at mid span – Bridge model no. 1

86



90



90

5.6

The values of bending moment, shear force and displacement

at point 3 (Pier) – Bridge model no. 2

91

5.7



91



96

xi



96

5.10



97

5.11



97



102



102

5.14



103



103

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1(a) Multi Span Bridge 8

2.1(b) Single Span Bridge 8

2.2 Single Span Integral Bridge 8

2.3 Semi Integral Abutment 10

2.4 Integral Bridge 11

2.5 Sequence of Construction for Integral Bridge 13

2.6 Connection between superstructure and substructure for

integral bridge

15

3.1 Flow Chart of the Research Methodology 32

3.2(a) Cross-section of elevation view of integral bridge 34

3.2(b) Typical Cross-section of abutment and pier 34

3.3 First Construction Stage 36

3.4 Second Construction Stage 37

3.5 Third Construction Stage 37

xiii

3.6 Fourth Construction Stage 38

3.7 Example of integral bridge modeling system 40

4.1(a) Bridge model no. 1 44

4.1(b) Bridge model no. 2 45

4.1(c) Bridge model no. 3 45

4.1(d) Bridge model no. 4 46

4.2 Integral bridge model with lines geometry 47

4.3 General icon in STAAD Pro 48

4.4(a) PTT Beam Diagram 49

4.4(b) The values of properties for section of PTT Beam 49

4.5 The values of properties for section of PTT Beam will to

assigned to the beam element

50

4.6(a) Example section properties for abutment element 50

4.6(b) Example section properties for pile element 51

4.7 Structural support assigned for pinned 53

4.8 Structural support assigned based to spring values 53

4.9 Structure model view after assigned spring stiffness 54

4.10 Example assigned dead load for self-weight of beam 56

4.11 Create Surface of Deck 57

4.12 Define roadway (carriageway width) 58

xiv

4.13 Run live load analysis using STAAD Beava version 58

4.14 Example assigned live load generated by Beava version 59

4.15 Example of Beava live load transferred to STAAD Pro 59

4.16(a) Horizontal force (earth pressure) on abutment 61

4.16(b) Assigned horizontal force to the abutment using STAAD

Pro

62

4.17 Calculation using the Bowles method by Excel sheet 63

4.18(a) Bending moment of the structure 66

4.18(b) Shear force of the structure 66

4.18(c) Displacement of the integral bridge structure 67

4.19(a) Single span 40 m 68

4.19(b) Multiple spans 60m 68

4.19(c) Multiple spans 70m 68

4.19(d) Multiple spans 80m 69

4.20 Arrangement of Reinforcement at Abutment ( single span

40 meter)

72

4.21 Arrangement of Reinforcement at Abutment ( multiple

spans 70 meter)

75

4.22 Arrangement of Reinforcement at Abutment ( multiple

spans 80 meter)

78

4.23 Layout of the bridge 79

4.24 Isometric view 80

4.25 Result moment 80

xv

4.23 Detail drawings for abutment of Sg. Penggorak, Pahang 81

5.1(i) Bending moment resulting from live load and other loads

except dead load

84

5.1(ii) Shear force resulting from live load and other loads

including dead load

84

5.1(a) Graph of bending moment vs load combinations

at point 1

87

5.1(b) Graph of shear force vs load combinations

at point 1

87


at point 2

88


at point 2

88


at mid span

89


at mid span

89


at point 1

92


at point 1

92


at point 2

93


at point 2

93


at point 3

94


at point 3

94


at mid span

95


at mid span

95


at point 1

98


at point 1

98

xvi


at point 2

99


at point 2

99


at point 3

100


at point 3

100


at mid span

101


at mid span

101


at point 1

104


at point 1

104


at point 2

105


at point 2

105


at point 3

106


at point 3

106


at mid span

107


at mid span

107

5.16 Arrangement of reinforcement on pier 109

xvii

LIST OF SYMBOLS

STAAD Pro - Structure software for analysis

S. Pro Beava - Software for live load analysis

WIM - Weight in motion

HA(UDL) - Distributed live load

HA(KEL) - Knife edge load

HB - Special vehicle live load

SW - Self-weight

DL - Dead load

Pa - Earth pressure

Ap.slab - Approach slab

Tr - Traction load

STC - Shrinkage, temperature and creep

TEM - Uniform temperature load

Ga - Self-weight of beam

Gc - Self-weight of slab

So - Earth pressure at rest

Gfin - Finishes load

Ks - Stiffness of soil (K-value)

Ixx - Second moment area about x axis

Iyy - Second moment area about y axis

Acsbeam - Cross-section area of beam

Acsdeckslab - Cross-section area of deckslab

γconcrete - Density of concrete

γ - Density of soil

Ø - Angle of friction

xviii

fcu - Strength of concrete

fy - Strength of reinforcement

Mmax - Maximum bending moment

Vmax - Maximum shear force

Z - Lever arm

d - Effective depth

As - Area of reinforcement required

As prov - Area of reinforcement provided

Asv - Area of reinforcement link

fyv - Strength of link reinforcement

Sv - centre to centre of link spacing

xix

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

A - D Example of calculation for soil stiffness 117 - 120

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

Integral Bridge is designed without any expansion joints in the bridge deck.

They are generally designed with the stiffness and flexibilities spread throughout the

structure/soil system so that all supports to accommodate all type of loads (primary

and secondary loads). They are single or multiple span bridges having their

superstructure cast integrally with their substructure. Generally these bridges include

capped pile stub abutments and piers. In other words, these types of bridge are

constructed without any movement joints between spans and abutments/piers.

One of the most important aspects in the design is that it can affect the life

and maintenance cost structure with the reduction or elimination of road expansion

joints and bearings. Unfortunately, this is too often overlooked or avoided. Joints

and bearings are expensive to buy, install, maintain and repair and more costly to

replace. The most frequently encountered corrosion problem involves leaking

expansion joints and seal that permit salt-laden run-off water from roadway surface

2

to attack the girder ends, bearings and supporting reinforced concrete substructures.

Elastomeric glands get filled with dirt, rocks and trash and ultimately fail to

function.

In the UK, the highways Agency Department Standard, BD57/01 and TOR

Bridge Unit CKASJ JKR Malaysia “Design for Durability” requires designers to

consider designing all bridges with length up to 60 meter and skew angles of less

than 30 degrees as integral bridges. However, the basis of this requirement is yet to

be justified.

The principal advantages of integral bridge include the following:

(i) Lower construction costs and future maintenance costs. In

conventional bridges much of the cost of maintenance is related to

repair of damage at joints.

(ii) Fewer piles are required for foundation support. No battered piled

piles are needed.

(iii) Construction is simple and rapid. The integral bridge act as a whole

unit.

(iv) Reduced removal of existing elements. Integral abutment and pier

bridges can be built around the existing foundation without requiring

the complete removal of existing substructure.

(v) The smooth, uninterrupted deck of the integral bridge is aesthetically

pleasing and it improves vehicular riding quality.

3

(vi) Design efficiencies are achieved in substructure design. Longitudinal

and transverse loads acting upon the superstructure may be

distributed over more number of supports.

1.2 Aim and Objectives

The aim of the study is basically focus on the integral bridges capability with

respect to the performance of the integral bridge is comparison to conventional

simply supported bridges after the application of primary and secondary loads.

Subsequently, the objectives of the study are as follows:

(i) To obtain the length limit for integral bridges in an analytical way,

where the limit factors include capacity of abutments and piers due to

primary and secondary loads.

(ii) To perform structural study on multiple spans integral bridge,

through analysis to further understand the performance these types of

bridges.

(iii) To perform analysis modeling using STAAD Pro software to

determine the bending moment, shear forces, displacement for the

whole bridge system.

(iv) To compare the results of integral bridges model with the various

length.

4

1.3 Problem Statement

In general, integral bridges are designed for a range of less than 60 meters in

length of span. If referred to the terms of reference from Bridge Unit, CKASJ JKR

Malaysia, length of integral bridges not more than 60 meters and not more than 30

degrees of skew. This limit must be proved by theoretical studies of the behavior of

an integral bridge.

This research is to find out and make a comparison of integral bridges with

various span lengths in terms of the performance particularly for the reactions

resulting (bending moments and shear forces) from the applied load. This study will

also look at what is essentially an integral bridges should be designed not exceed 60

meters, and what happens if integral bridges designed beyond the limit particularly

for the multiple spans bridge.

Generally, the overall problems of this study are:

(i) There is no solid basis for the limits of integral bridges.

(ii) The behavior of an integral bridge that exceeds the limit, particularly

for the more than 60 meters long and what are the things to be

considered in terms of how to design is limited.

(iii) There is no exact concept of loading that is correct for the analysis of

integral bridges.

5

1.4 The scope of the study

One of the scopes of the study is to check the structural capacity of the

design concept for beams, piers, abutments and foundation systems and make a

comparison of the design for integral bridge and conventional type. This study is

also includes the combination of load cases acting on the bridge and evaluate the

behavior of the bridge and make a comparison between single span and multiple

span.

In addition, studies to assess the key parameters to be considered in the

analysis and design of integral bridges and evaluate the ability of integral bridge

structure based on the theory by using the software to modeling the structure system.

Results of the analysis will be considered in this study are such as bending moments

and shear forces on the connection between the beam and abutment/pier and also the

reaction force at the pile system due to soil interaction.

114

REFERENCES

1. O’Brien E.J., Keogh D.L. and Lehane B.M. (1999), Bridge Deck Analysis.

London, E & FN Spon.

2. Connal J. (2002) Integral Abutment Bridges – Australian and US Practice,

Design & Construction of Integral Bridges.

3. Dr. Abd. Aziz Arshad (2001), Course on: Bridge Design to JKR

Specification, Civil & Structure Engineering Technical Division (IEM).

4. Barker R.M. and Puckett J.A. (1997), Design of Highway Bridges, Based On

AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification.

5. Manual Design For Road and Bridge, BA42/96 (1996), Integral Bridge

Design, Department of Highway, UK.

6. Terms of Reference for Bridges and Viaducts Structures (Conventional)

(2012), Bridge Unit, CKASJ, JKR Malaysia.)

7. Chatterjee S. (2003), Modern Steel Bridges. UK Blackwell Science LTD.

8. Vasant C. Mistry (2004), Integral Abutment and Jointless Bridges, Federal

Highway Administration, Washington DC, USA.

9. Sergei Terzaghi and Gillian Sisk (2009), Integral Bridge Design –

Derivation of the spring constant for modelling soil structure interaction.

10. Jaromir Krizek (2011), Integral Bridges Soil-Structure Interaction, Czech

Rep.

11. Unit Jambatan (1984), Buku Panduan Rekabentuk Jambatan, JKR Malaysia.

115

12. Azlan Abd. Rahman (2013), Lecture Notes: Bridge Engineering, Integral

Bridge Design, UTM.

performance of integral bridge with various span...

Documents