ENCE717 – Bridge Engineering Part III – Special Topics of Bridges
Special Topics of Bridges II
Chung C. Fu, Ph.D., P.E.
(http: www.best.umd.edu)
1
Redundancy Analysis (Chapter 15)
• Redundancy is the quality of a bridge to perform as
designed in a damaged state due to the presence of
multiple load paths.
• Three types of redundancy, load-path, structural and
internal redundancies
• The non-redundant steel members are the fracture
critical members (FCM).
• Fracture critical members are those in axial tension
or tension components of bending members whose
failure would result in the failure of the structure.
1. Strut-and-Tie Model (13.0)
2. Stability (14.0)
3. Redundancy Analysis (15.0)
4. Integral Bridges (16.0)
5. Bridge Geometry (18.0)
6. Dynamic/Earthquake Analysis
Redundancy Analysis
Load Path Redundancy - A member is considered load path
redundant if an alternative and sufficient load path is
determined to exist. Load path redundancy is the type of
redundancy that designers consider when they count parallel
girders or load paths. However, merely determining that
alternate load paths exist is not enough. The alternative load
paths must have sufficient capacity to carry the load
redistributed to them from an adjacent failed member. If the
additional redistributed load fails the alternative load path,
progressive failure occurs, and the members could in fact, be
fracture critical. In determining the sufficiency of alternative
load paths, all elements present (primary and secondary
members) should be considered.
 Redundancy Analysis Redundancy Analysis
Structural redundancy - A member is considered structurally FCM by Caltrans:
redundant if its boundary conditions or supports are such that • Tension ties in arch bridges
failure of the member merely changes the boundary or support • Tension members in truss bridges
conditions but does not result in the collapse of the • Tension flanges and webs in two-girder bridges
superstructure. Again, the member with modified support • Tension flanges and webs in single or double box girder bridges
conditions must be sufficient to carry loads in its new • Tension flanges and webs in floor beams/cross girders
configuration. For example, the failure of the negative–moment • Tension braces in the cross frame of horizontally curved girder
region of a two span continuous girder is not critical to the bridges
survival of the superstructure if the positive-moment region is • Attachments welded to a FCM when their dimension exceeds 100
sufficient to carry the load as a simply supported girder. mm (4 in.) in the direction parallel to the calculated tensile stress in
Internal Redundancy - A member is considered internally the FCM.
redundant if alternative and sufficient load paths exist within the • Tension components of bent caps
member itself such as the multiple plies of riveted steel • Splice plates of a FCM
member.

Redundancy
Analysis Redundancy Analysis

• Figure 15.1 -
Flowchart for
identifying FCMs of Design Alternates Structural Elements Code Checks
complex steel bridges
All Basic Uncut Main Truss Members Dead Load Conditions
(Caltran 2004) Designs Gusset Plates Live Load Maxima
Connections Tension Allowables
& Column Compression
Fatigue (stress range)
All Basic Cut Cross Beams Non-Fatigue
Designs Supports Secondary Stresses
Half-Truss Stability
Redundancy
Deflections
 Figure 15.5 – Plastic
section definition of
Redundancy Analysis fracture critical
members (FCMs)
Redundancy Analysis
7 10
6 8 9 11

5 12
4 13

Figure 15.12 - Attack Scenario 1

Response (Step 11)
3 14
2 16 15

Figure 15.11 ‐ Attack Scenario 1 (674 lbs 
TNT) Static Equivalent Joint Loads on a PC 
Beam Bridge

Figure 15.4 - 3D Model in ANSYS

Redundancy Analysis Redundancy Analysis

1. Member failure, load factor LF1 - Live load on the linear
elastic model and then increasing the live load until the first
member fails
2. Ultimate limit state, load factor LFu – Live load on the
Figure 15.16 - Attack Scenario 1 nonlinear structural model and then increasing the live load
Response (Step 10) until the bridge collapses.
3. Functionality limit state, factor LFf - Live load on the
nonlinear structural model and then increasing the live load
Figure 15.15 ‐ Attack Scenario 1 (674 lbs  until displacement in a main longitudinal member equal to
TNT) Static Equivalent Joint Loads of a  the span length/100.
Continuous Steel Plate Girder Bridge
4. Damaged condition limit state, factor LFd – Live load on the
nonlinear structural model of the damaged bridge and then
increasing the live load until the bridge collapses. 12
 Redundancy Analysis Redundancy Analysis
Bridge Redundancy Indices: Possible damaged form:
•Ru=the redundancy in the ultimate limit state • Suspenders and ties tension yield (Find
Ru =LFu/LF1 ≥ 1.3 min reqd. the most efficient hunger W3)
•Rf= the redundancy in the functionality limit state • Arch instability under compression and
Rf=LFf/LF1 ≥ 1.1 min reqd. moment (arch rib springline and x=32.5m)
•Rd= the redundancy in the damaged condition limit • The main beam subjected to bending
state. moment (Hunger W3 & X=31.5m)
116m arch span
Rd=LFd/LF1 ≥ 0.5 min reqd.
16.5m roadway
13 14
23.08m height

Redundancy Analysis Integral Bridges (Chapter 16)

Bridge Redundancy Indices:
•Ru=the redundancy in the ultimate limit state
Ru =LFu/LF1 = 74/49=1.51 ≥ 1.3 min. reqd.
•Rf= the redundancy in the functionality limit state
Rf=LFf/LF1 = 64/49=1.3 ≥ 1.1 min. reqd. Figure 16.3 – Integral abutment with flexible piles

Figure 16.1 – Integral pier on ramp FR‐A over 
•Rd= the redundancy in the damaged condition limit state. SR6060, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Middle hanger fails Rd=LFd/LF1 = 54.86/49 = 1.12.

Single tie failure Rd=LFd/LF1 = 60/49 = 1.22
Failure in anti-rotation in crown of arch Rd= 51.03/49 = 1.04
Failure in anti-rotation in springline of arch Rd= 44.65/49=0.91
15
min. Rd =0.91 ≥ 0.5 min reqd
 Integral Bridges Integral Bridges
(1) Equivalent cantilever FE model

(a) Actual system (b) Equivalent system

Figure 16.4 – Semi‐integral abutment Figure 16.5 – Full integral abutment Figure 16.7 – Cantilever idealization of a fixed-headed pile

Integral Bridges Integral Bridges

(2) Soil-spring FE model (3) Soil continuum FE model

soil-pile interaction where the

Figure 16.8 – The modified Ramberg‐ soil is idealized by three sets of
Osgood curve for a typical p‐y curve springs: lateral springs, vertical
springs and a point spring.
Soil spring and p-y curve - To allow the stiffness of the deck-girder
connection to be varied, spring tied elements are employed at their
interface. Nonlinear spring elements model the soil backfill as well as the
soil around the piles.
 Bridge Geometry (Chapter 18) Bridge Geometry
• Type of horizontal curves –
– Tangents (straight lines)
– Arc (constant curvature)
– Spiral (a transition from one curvature to another that •Horizontal curves of a roadway centerline and span layout
the curvature change is proportional to curve
distance)
• Type of vertical curves –
•Girder axes follow roadway horizontal curves
– Parabolic curve (sag or crest vertical curve) Figure 18.1 – Roadway and girder horizontal curves

• Types of transverse curves

– Parabolic curve
• Superelevation and superwidening 21
Figure 18.2 – Girder axes follow roadway vertical curves, and curves in girder profiles

Bridge Geometry Bridge Geometry

Figure 18.6 – Transverse curve and local coordinate system

Figure 18.4 – An example of a plane curve ‐ components of a compound curve

Superelevation case

Figure 18.5 – An example of a vertical curve – components of a vertical curve Figure 18.7 – An example of key cross sections

 Bridge Geometry Bridge Geometry
Precast Segment Bridge 
Superwidening case
Geometry  Control

Figure 18.8 – Plane view of a transverse curve transition example

Figure 18.16 – Schematic views of short‐line 
casting system
In short-line casting system only one
girder segment is casted at one time on the
casting bed, and cured segments are
moved to storage yard.

Figure 18.17 – Adjustment of match segment

and form works for casting segment (courtesy of
Figure 18.9 – Perspective view mainline and cross sections NiniveTM CASSEFORME)

Bridge Geometry Bridge Geometry

Figure 18.19 – Segments 
assembled and global/local 
coordinate systems

The disadvantage of short-line

system is the geometry control
during the casting of each
segment.

Figure 18.20 – Local (casting yard) coordinate system and 
control points for alignment Figure 18.24 – Prediction of setup values for a match‐cast segment