0 views

Uploaded by Satish Kumar

analysis of Skewed Bridge using Grillage Method

- Mathcad - aibox_cb.pdf
- 125913139-Winches-and-Reels-Tension-in-Line-and-Pressure-on-the-Drum-and-Flanges.pdf
- Analysis and Experimental Verification
- Excerpt from FEMA
- 3.5 Analysis of Weld Group
- SeisImager Sw Surface Wave Analysis Software
- Imp Ques
- mabhas-10
- 1971 G Herrmann Dynamics & stability of mechanical systems with follower forces and stability NASA CR 1782.pdf
- d_Part_59
- Combined Footing 08
- SECTION 507.docx
- Blue Book Cross Sections
- Isolated Foundation
- Physics Course List
- NS23-1masonry
- EartquakeLectureNore.pdf
- Graded Examples in Reinforced Concrete Design Dias
- MEEG 321 Homework 1 2018
- Modelling the Effect of Climate Change Induced Soil Settling on Drinking Water Distribution Pipes

You are on page 1of 6

Center for Structural Control, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73072

zeng@ou.edu, jkuehn@ou.edu, jsun@upc.com, stalford@ou.edu

Abstract

The 1998 Bridge Inventory classified approximately 68,000 of the 280,000

American highway bridges as substandard. One way to extend the useful service life of a

bridge is to reduce peak vehicle loads. Field tests conducted at Walnut Creek Bridge on

Interstate 35 near Purcell, Oklahoma revealed that it is common for vehicles to exert peak

dynamic loads 1.3-1.7 times their static weights on the bridge. The focus of this work is

to model the dynamic interaction between vehicles and the bridge to facilitate the

development of strategies aimed at reducing dynamic loads applied to the bridge.

Walnut Creek Bridge is a two-lane, four-span, continuous steel girder bridge with a

reinforced concrete deck. The bridge structure is modeled as an assembly of grillage

members, consisting of longitudinal and transverse torsion beams. The finite element

model includes 205 nodes and 425 elements. The vehicle used in the analysis is a

36,000kg tractor-trailer, which is the heaviest vehicle allowed on this bridge without a

permit. The vehicle model is a 7 degree-of-freedom planar representation that accounts

for both the heave and pitch. The equations of motion of the vehicle and the bridge are

treated as two subsystems and are solved separately using the fourth order Runge-Kutta

integration method in state space. The compatibility equations at the interface between

the vehicle tires and bridge deck are satisfied by an iterative procedure.

The simulation results are compared to experimental results obtained by using a

tractor-trailer for both quasi-static and dynamic tests. A response of a typical point of the

bridge has a peak error of 8.2% and an RMS error of 12.4% for the quasi-static case, and

a 17.6% peak error and a 24.5% RMS error for the dynamic case, respectively. The close

agreement between the simulations and experiments enables a study of the influence of

various parameters which contribute to the response of the interacted system.

Introduction

The bridge/vehicle interaction problem has been the focus of research for more than

150 years. State-of-art reviews of related research are provided by Huang (1976), and

GangaRao (1984). In the past two decades, great improvements have been made in

modeling, methods, and experiment validation. Among the methods used, numerical

methods are dominant.

The grillage numerical method has gained an increased popularity in the static and

dynamic analysis of plate structures. By making use of a grillage discretization, the

flexural and torsional rigidities are determined to closely approximate a plate. West

(1973) reported a study, where 53 models and full-sized bridges were compared. The

work recommended the use of grillage analysis for slab and pseudo-slab bridge decks.

Tan et al. (1998) concluded that the accuracy, simplicity and speed of the grillage analog

make it the most suitable model for bridge analysis.

1

The presented paper treats the interaction problem between a stiffened skewed bridge

and vehicles. By using the grillage method, the bridge deck is modeled as an assembly of

torsion-beams, coupled with a vehicle having 7 Degrees of Freedom (DOF). An iterative

procedure is developed to satisfy the equilibrium conditions at the interface between the

vehicle and the bridge. A full-scale testing was conducted. The numerical solutions

obtained reasonably agree with test results.

A skewed bridge has a deck with a parallelogram shape (Fig. 1). A plate analog has

been considered by a number of researchers. However, the solutions by these methods,

with parallelogram shape and arbitrary support conditions, become tedious and

sometimes impossible. The grillage method, on the other hand, is less time consuming

and more efficient in such cases.

The bridge motion is composed of many modes, which can not be predicted by either

simple bending or torsion theory. Therefore, a torsion beam element is developed as a

grillage member. Such a torsion beam element is subjected to a transverse force

distribution and a torsional moment distribution. The nodes undergo not only planar

translational and rotational displacements, but also torsional displacements.

Correspondingly, there are transverse joint forces, bending moments and torsional

moments at each node. Ignoring the bridge damping, the governing equations of motion

for transverse and torsional vibration are:

∂ 4 w( x, t ) ∂ 2 w( x, t )

EI + ρ A = f ( x, t )

∂x 4 ∂x 2 (1)

∂ 2θ ( x, t ) ∂ 2θ ( x, t )

GJ + m ( x , t ) = I

∂x 2 ∂t 2

0

where w(x,t) and θ(x,t) are the transverse and torsional displacement, EI and GJ are the

flexural and torsional rigidity , ρ and A are the mass density and the cross section area, I0

is the mass moment of inertia per unit length, and f(x,t) and m(x,t) are the external

transverse force (including bending moment) and torsional moment per unit length,

applied at the nodes.

The effective flexural or torsional rigidity of a grillage element is equivalent to the

corresponding rigidity of the strip of the plate,

EI = bD, D = Eh3/12(1-v2), GJ = bD,

where h is the thickness of the plate, v is the Poisson ratio, and b is the width of a strip of

the plate.

It is noted that the stiffeners are not necessarily perpendicular to the girders. But for

the oblique case, the coordinate transformation can be handily employed to obtain the

element stiffness and mass matrices in the global coordinate.

The deck is idealized as a grillage, with all the girders and diaphrams coinciding with

certain torsion beam members. Close spacing between grillage members provides

accurate results, but increases computational effort. The optimum assembly results from a

compromise between accuracy, simplicity and efficiency. The grillage assembly for the

bridge structure is shown in Fig. 1. The abutments and the intermediate supports are

assumed to be simple point supports.

Following the general procedure used in finite element analysis, equations for the

discrete bridge structure motion are formulated as:

2

[M B ]{w&&} + [K B ]{w} = {FBT } (2)

where [MB] and [KB] are the mass and stiffness matrices, respectively, {w} is the

generalized bridge displacement vector, containing transverse and torsional

displacements, and {FBT} is the generalized interactive force vector.

38' (11.6m)

100' (30.5m)

400' (122m)

Vehicle Dynamics

Researchers have developed various models to present the traffic excitation. A planar

model with 7 DOF (Fig. 2) is employed in the present work. The equations of motion can

be derived relative to the static equilibrium positions and are expressed in the matrix form

as:

[M T ]{&z&} + [CT ]{z&} + [K T ]{z} = [DT ]{Rd } (3)

where [MT], [CT] and [KT] are mass, damping and stiffness matrices of the vehicle,

respectively, {z} is the generalized displacement vector, consisting of the heave and pitch

DOF, {Rd} is the road/bridge deck surface profile vector, the number of whose non zero

elements are equal to the number of points in contact with the bridge, [DT] is the mapping

matrix consisting of the tire stiffness.

m6, J6

z7

m5, J5 z6

z5

C6

K5 C5 K6 C7 K8 C8

K7

z1 z2 z3 z4

m1 m2 m3 m4

C2

K1 C1 K2 C3 K4 C4

r2 K3 r3 r4

r1

Bridge/Vehicle Coupling

The vehicle and the bridge interact through the tire forces imposed on the bridge

deck. Considering the hth axle or tire coupling with bridge, assuming the vertical tire

force FVh affects the local nodes i, j, p, q, in the vicinity of the tire contact point Vh (Fig.

3), the interactive force at any contact point can be expressed as:

FVh = − K h [z h − (rVh − wVh )] (4)

with the subscript h denoting the tire, Kh and zh being the stiffness and the DOF of the hth

tire, rVh being road surface profile at Vh, and wVh the deflection of the contact point Vh,

which can be expressed as:

3

wVh = ∑ φ k (x , y )wk (k = i, j , p, q ) (5)

where x = vt − x j ; y = y j ; and φk are weighing factors.

The equivalent node force induced by the interactive force can be expressed as:

Fk = ψ k ( x , y )FVh (6)

where ψ k are mapping factors.

Substitution of Eqs. (4) and (5) into Eq. (6) yields:

Fk = − K hψ k ( x , y )z h + K hψ k (x , y )rVh − K hψ k ( x , y ) ∑ φ a ( x , y )wa (7)

a = i , j , p ,q

Combining Eqs. (2), (3) and (7), the general equations of the coupled bridge/vehicle

system can be written as:

[M c ]{W&& }+ [C c ]{W& }+ [K c ]{W } = [Dc ]{Rd } (8)

where {W} is the generalized displacement vector, consisting of both the bridge and

vehicle DOF, Mc, Cc and Kc are mass, damping and stiffness matrices of the coupled

system. It is noted that submatrices of Kc and Dc vary as functions of both time and

position of the contact points.

y FVh

i q

Vh (x, y)

p

j x

As the bridge/vehicle coupling is concerned, it is almost impossible to find a closed

form solution. It only can be solved using numerical methods, or combined numerical

and analytical methods (Veletsos and Huang, 1970; Green and Cebon, 1994, Yang and

Fonder, 1996). An iterative procedure is carried out to achieve the geometric

compatibility conditions and equilibrium conditions for the interactive force at the

interface between the bridge and vehicle at every integral time step.

The Walnut Creek Bridge is located on Interstate 35 Highway near Purcell,

Oklahoma (Fig. 1). The 400ft (122m) long bridge has three intermediate piers and two

abutments located at 100ft (30.5m) intervals. The bridge deck is skewed at 45o to the

centerline of the roadway. The deck is 38ft (11.6m) wide, including two 12ft (3.7m) wide

lanes with traffic running north. The reinforced concrete deck is mounted on five

continuous steel girders. The girders are stiffened by diaphragms that are perpendicular to

the longitudinal centerline of the bridge.

The test vehicle (Fig. 2) is a so-called rock truck with gross weight of 80,000lb

(17,600kg), provided by Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT). Quasi-static

tests at 5mph (2.25m/s) and dynamic tests at the posted speed of 65mph (29.2m/s) were

conducted.

A typical dynamic validation result is shown in Fig. 4. The response is shown at the

central girder of the third span (Fig. 1). The simulated system provides a good estimate of

the peak stress in the girder caused by the vehicle.

4

The stresses were used to evaluate the Dynamic Amplification Factor (DAF) for the

mid-span points, where DAF is defined as the ratio of the maximum pure dynamic stress

to the maximum static stress. The DAF from test data, with the DAF calculated from the

grillage method, are given in Table 1. It shows that most of the DAF are within the

expected limits assumed by NCHRP 299, but the DAF at the western girder are much

higher. The peak error and RMS (root-mean-square) error are listed in Table 2 for the

quasi-static case, and in Table 3 for the dynamic case.

7

x 10

2

1.5

simulation

1 test

Stress (Pa)

0.5

-0.5

-1

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Time (s)

Locations Span I Span II Span III Span IV

Central Girder 0.13/0.16 0.49/0.31 0.24/0.21 0.41/0.52

Eastern Girder 0.37/0.42 0.43/0.56 0.15/0.22 0.44/0.51

Western Girder -*/1.56 1.38/1.64 1.15/1.43 2.05/1.94

* Not available

Locations Span I Span II Span III Span IV

Central Girder 8.3/0.6 4.1/4.2 0.9/18.3 9.8/45.7

Eastern Girder 2.9/18.8 31.1/29.9 8.2/12.4 22.1/18.4

Western Girder - 14.1/49.9 21.3/51.2 12.2/38.4

Locations Span I Span II Span III Span IV

Central Girder 21.5/14.6 6.6/4.3 5.9/10.7 3.1/17.8

Eastern Girder 23.9/12.1 25.4/26.6 17.6/24.5 20.0/24.6

Western Girder - 12.9/32.8 12.1/11.4 13.7/32.4

A coupled system is developed for analyzing the interaction between a heavy vehicle

and a highway bridge. The bridge is idealized as an assembly of grillage members of

torsion beams. The vehicle is modeled as a 7 DOF planar system. The coupling results in

a set of 2nd order ordinary differential equations, which is solved by a numerical

procedure. The comparison between numerical results and experimental results gives

5

reasonably good agreement. The procedure can be used to analyze the response of the

coupled bridge/vehicle system for any number of spans, girders and tractor-trailer type

vehicles with any axle configuration, as well as to exam the effects of vehicle suspension,

straight or curved traveling paths, pavement surface irregularities etc., besides the effect

of the vehicle speed, spacing, and weight.

Reference:

1. Gangarao, H. V. S., Research in Vibration Analysis of highway bridges, Shock and

vibration digest v16, no 1~6, 1984.

2. Green, M. F., Cebon, D., dynamic response of highway bridges to heavy vehicle

loads: theory and experimental validation, Journal of sound and vibration, 170(1), 51-

78, 1994

3. Huang, T., Vibration of Bridges, Shock and vibration digest, v8 no 1~6, 1976.

4. Moses, F., Schilling, C. G., and Raju, K. S., Fatigue Evaluation Procedures for Steel

Bridges, NCHRP 299, Transportation research board, National Research Council,

Washington, D. C., November 1987.

5. Tan, G. H., Brameld, G. H., and Thambiratnam, D. P., Development of an analytical

model for treating bridge-vehicle interaction, Engineering Structures, Vol. 20, Nos 1-

2, pp 54-61, 1998

6. Veletsos, A. S., and Huang, T. Analysis of dynamic response of highway bridges,

Journal of the engineering mechanics division, proceedings of ASCE, Vol. 96, No.

EM5, Ref. 35, 593-620, October, 1970

7. West, R., Recommendations on the use of grillage analysis for slab and pseudo-slab

bridge decks, Cement and Concrete Association and Construction Industry Research

and Information Association, London, UK, 1973

8. Yang, F. and Fonder, G. A., " An iterative solution method for dynamic response of

bridge-vehicles systems", earthquake engineering and structural dynamics, Vol. 25,

pp 195-215, 1996.

- Mathcad - aibox_cb.pdfUploaded bysere
- 125913139-Winches-and-Reels-Tension-in-Line-and-Pressure-on-the-Drum-and-Flanges.pdfUploaded byjosebernal_mza
- Analysis and Experimental VerificationUploaded byAndonny Daq Delgado
- Excerpt from FEMAUploaded byKeshav Vaity
- 3.5 Analysis of Weld GroupUploaded byisracuma
- SeisImager Sw Surface Wave Analysis SoftwareUploaded bywindarta.rezki
- Imp QuesUploaded byVimal Chand
- mabhas-10Uploaded byHamed Gerami
- 1971 G Herrmann Dynamics & stability of mechanical systems with follower forces and stability NASA CR 1782.pdfUploaded byAnonymous zXVPi2Ply
- d_Part_59Uploaded byMark24_12
- Combined Footing 08Uploaded byjuriesk
- SECTION 507.docxUploaded byFerDenanUrotZz
- Blue Book Cross SectionsUploaded bystavros_sterg
- Isolated FoundationUploaded byvijaystructural
- Physics Course ListUploaded bybanktick2
- NS23-1masonryUploaded byqatarstructz30
- EartquakeLectureNore.pdfUploaded byOsmanKatli
- Graded Examples in Reinforced Concrete Design DiasUploaded byAmgad Talal
- MEEG 321 Homework 1 2018Uploaded byAbu Jafar Rasel
- Modelling the Effect of Climate Change Induced Soil Settling on Drinking Water Distribution PipesUploaded byIonut Patras
- chapter 6 Beam StressesUploaded byzaid
- 29c-Closed Sections UB,UC Subject to Torsion-type 07.PngUploaded byParthi Ban
- TAPER 5Uploaded byHareesh Kilaru
- 34B.docxUploaded byJamie Schultz
- B4 Stress Analysis_ (1)Uploaded byNa
- 547Uploaded byMaharani Lestari S
- Lecture 2 Beams - Mar 14 - k - Rev 8hUploaded bySamuel Shim
- p10Uploaded byPranay Reddy
- Design of Dogging BeamUploaded bySujeet Kumar
- types of cracks in reinforcement concreteUploaded byMohamed Salah

- 1 Tensile Embed MentUploaded byAmro Ahmad Ali
- Pipe Rack Design ReportUploaded bySatish Kumar
- Letter LearnerUploaded bySatish Kumar
- UPA Channel SizesUploaded bySatish Kumar
- Trace the Alphabet!Uploaded bySatish Kumar
- extns to be deleted-staad files.txtUploaded bySatish Kumar
- Lokfix (1).pdfUploaded bymangjit
- NEBOSH IGCUploaded bySatish Kumar
- Backer Rod ITPUploaded bySatish Kumar
- Steel section Properties tableUploaded bydarkdarkhbk
- Raft Found v 215 -V 223-R1Uploaded bySatish Kumar
- Ring Wall DesignUploaded bySatish Kumar
- Is 516 Method of Test for Strength of ConcreteUploaded byselva_651950
- ACI 302.1R_Errata1-2004Uploaded bySatish Kumar
- 204_1Uploaded byRaj Kumar
- Ny Irwin WindUploaded bySergiu Tarala
- Welding_and_Hot-Dip_Galvanizing.pdfUploaded byIván Köhler A
- Design of Concrete Structure for Retaining Aqueous LiquidsUploaded bySatish Kumar
- BS336.pdfUploaded bySatish Kumar
- Metal Scaffolding Safety - MssUploaded bybangladragos
- Metal Scaffolding Safety - MssUploaded bybangladragos
- Kalani BookUploaded byniranjan_nitj
- Is 1893 2002 Part1 Design of Structures EarthquakesUploaded byPriyanka

- Air Indoor Enthalphy Form.pdfUploaded byerpin
- KG_PTIFINAL4_2toprint.pdfUploaded byVenkatesh Sivarchana
- Broucher Pile Integrity TestUploaded byDeepak Kumar Mallick
- CVE 230. Lab Report 3 (Compression Tests on Douglar Fir and Ponderosa Pine Wood).Uploaded byJuan Villa
- Crosby Shackle CatalogueUploaded byabhi1648665
- MH-WH Instruction ManualUploaded bysercopetrol
- 211823898 Asme Section Ix InterpretationsUploaded byippon_osoto
- Analysis of Industrial Slabs-On-groundUploaded bybatteekh
- NHTSA Tire Aging TestUploaded byjrgoffin
- Fan Arrangements Rotation Discharge and Motor Position Fe 3900Uploaded byAdriano Santos
- Hyundai 160d 7eUploaded bydemidover
- Decision ED 2003 09 RMUploaded byzmajchek
- Advanced Composite MaterialUploaded byDinesh Kumar
- Eclipse 2GTurbo ECU PinoutsUploaded byHasani Yaakub
- 908_STYLUS_PRO_9400_9800Uploaded byIulian_D
- Coefficient-of-Thermal-Expansion.xlsUploaded byemiljuchiac
- 02623_GRP_PipeUploaded bysethu1091
- REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES DESIGN AND DRAWING.pdfUploaded byAnkit
- DC to ACUploaded byKumar Pawar
- Chap 3 ThermodynamicsUploaded byAsmawi Mohd Khailani
- Simulation of Rising Bubbles Dynamics Using LBMUploaded by29mmch
- Manual Transfer Switch BrochureUploaded byFidel Castrzzo Bae
- v15n2p279.pdfUploaded byAkhlaq Hussain
- is.10189.1.1982Uploaded byrajpd28
- Cement RetainerUploaded byahmed
- Sliding FrictionUploaded byIqbal Jafar
- Diesel Generator Havana – Robin – MediumUploaded byjengandxb
- Natural Ventilation - WikipediaUploaded bynagarjuna reddy m
- tutorial ansysUploaded byAnonymous VDnLHNG7QQ
- AnInvestigationUploaded bywwtrice