SHEAR AND REACTION DISTRIBUTIONS single bearings in the analysis.
The location of the bearings
IN CONTINUOUS SKEW
B
COMPOSITE BRIDGES
Discussion by Bruce W. Golley3
The authors have made an excellent contribution to the un-
derstanding of the behavior of continuous skew bridges, and
have presented valuable empirical formulas to enable bridge
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
designers to more accurately predict reaction and shear distri-
butions under dead and live loads. The authors have demon-
strated through model tests and finite element analysis the crit-
ical nature of obtuse corners in both single-span and
multiple-span bridges. The discusser was particularly inter-
ested in the comparison of support reactions under simulated
truck loading measured during tests and verified by finite el-
ement modelling. As the authors observed, "The maximum
reaction at the simply supported end of the loaded long span
increased from 10.4 kN in the case of bridge model 1 with
skew angle e = 0° to 14.1 kN in the case of bridge model 2
with skew angle e = 45°. This represents an increase of about
36%." It should be noted that with the rectangular bridge
model, 1, the maximum reaction occurred at an interior beam,
whereas with the skewed bridge model, 2, the maximum re-
action was at the outside beam at an obtuse corner. The max-
imum reaction measured on an outer beam in bridge model 1
was 7.7 kN (Fig. 4); hence, if the outer beam reactions are
compared, the increase is about 83%, which demonstrates even
more the critical nature of the obtuse corners of this type of
bridge.
The discusser was recently involved with an investigation
into the cause of cracking of a continuous 45° skew curved
bridge (Golley et al. 1994). Though the bridge was a pre-
stressed concrete voided slab bridge, and thus of a different
type from the steel-concrete composite bridges investigated by
the authors, the effects of skew are similar. The cracking oc-
curred at the obtuse corners; therefore, the investigation con-
centrated on the reactions in those locations. Brief details of
the investigation are summarized below to reinforce the au-
thors' conclusion that "increasing the skew increases signifi-
cantly the reaction of the exterior girder and decreases it for
the interior girder."
The bridge is a two-span continuous prestressed concrete
voided slab bridge, with a plan view as shown in Fig. 10. The
general form of cracking on the bridge soffit is also shown in
the figure. The spans were each 22.86 m measured along the
centerline, which had a radius of 550 m. Because the bridge
was curved, there was a 3% cross fall. The deck thickness was
760 mm, increasing to 1220 mm at the central pier. The voids
were 460 mm in diameter and were discontinuous to permit
reinforcement of transverse end beams, diaphragms, and a cen-
tral headstock, all of which were skew. The transverse rein-
forcement in the top and bottom slabs was also skew. The
bridge was supported by five pairs of elastomeric bearings at
each end, and by five Pot Stay bearings at the central pier.
The general form of the cracking on the bridge soffit is also
shown in Fig. JO.
An elastic analysis was carried out using the finite element
program LUSAS (LUSAS 1994). The bridge deck was mod-
elled as an equivalent thick orthotropic plate. using 504 8-node
curved quadrilateral elements. Bearing pairs were replaced by
"November 1996, Vol. I, No.4. by Tarek Ebeido and John B. Kennedy
(Paper 11028).
'Sr. Lect., School of Civ. Engrg., University College, Australian De-
fence Force Academy. Canberra ACT 2600, Australia.
J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1995, 9(1): 91-92
are shown in Fig. 10. Reactions due to dead load were deter-
mined using concrete and bituminous concrete densities spec-
ified in design drawings. Reactions due to prestressing were
determined from the tendon profile using losses consistent
with the AUSTROADS Bridge Design Code (AUSTROADS
1992). To determine the most severe reactions due to live load
at the various bearings, influence surfaces were drawn using
the Mtiller-Breslau principle by imposing a unit displacement
at the bearing location and plotting displacement contours.
These influence surfaces enabled the current AUSTROADS
design vehicles to be positioned to cause maximum reactions
due to live load. The surfaces for the reactions near an acute
corner (bearing 1) and near an obtuse corner (bearing 5) are
shown in Figs. 11 and 12, respectively, which demonstrate the
significant influence of skew on the reactions. A dynamic load
allowance of 0.4 was applied to the live loads. and maximum
reactions at all bearings due to dead, live, impact, and pre-
stressing loads were determined. The maximum estimated re-
actions under working loads are summarized in Table 4.
The obtuse corner was found to satisfy the shear provisions
of the AUSTROADS Bridge Design Code under a force of
756 kN' However, based on a number of simplifying assump-
tions and using a capacity reduction factor of 0.8, it was de-
termined that an upward force of 776 kN applied at bearing 5
would cause a yield line to develop at the corner. The crack
pattern corresponding to the yield line agreed approximately
with the observed crack pattern, although the crack directions
were influenced by the prestressing forces. Thus, the maximum
working reaction consistent with current design loads was al-
most the same as the ultimate capacity of the corner. Of
course, a yield line did not develop, because following crack-
ing, the reaction was redistributed to other bearings. It is of
interest to note that, had the transverse reinforcement been laid
normal to the bridge centerline, the ultimate corner reaction to
cause a yield line would have increased to 1368 kN, well in
excess of the working reaction of 756 kN. Based on this ob-
servation, the cracks were filled with epoxy. and external
10
9
3
8
2
...-: 7
....-~6
• BEARING
FIG. 10. Plan of Bridge. Showing Crack Pattern on Soffit
0.0
0.0
1.0 0.5
FIG. 11. Influence Surface for Reaction at Acute Corner Bear-
ing
1.0 0.5 0.0
FIG. 12. Influence Surface for Reaction at Obtuse Corner
Bearing
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING / MAY 1998/91
 TABLE 4. Maximum Reactions at End Bearings
Maximum reactIon
Bearing number (kN)
(1 ) (2)
I 325
2 602
3 837
4 887
5 756
plates were glued to the soffit nonnal to the centerline. Con-
stant monitoring since the repair work was carried out in 1993
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Nacional De Ingenieria on 10/19/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
indicates further cracking has been prevented.
From Table 4, it can be seen that the maximum reaction at
the obtuse corner is 2.3 times the maximum reaction at the
acute corner. In the authors' tests, summarized in Fig. 4, this
ratio is between about 5 and 7, but the bridge type and the
loading pattern were different. An important point to empha-
size continually is that high reactions occur at obtuse comers
of single- and multiple-span skew bridges, and the authors'
extensive parametric study enables designers to conservatively
estimate the forces.
APPENDIX. REFERENCES
AUSTROADS bridge design code. (1992). AUSTROADS, Sydney, Aus-
tralia.
Golley, B. w., Jovanovic, M. P.• and Bylo, R. J. (1994). "The cause and
repair of the partial failure of a skew prestressed concrete bridge."
Proc. Australasian Structural Engineering Conference, Sydney, Aus-
tralia, 859 - 862.
LUSAS user manual. (1994). FEA Ltd., Surrey, U.K.
92/ JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING I MAY 1998
J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 1995, 9(1): 91-92
Closure by Tarek Ebeido4 and
John B. KennedY'
We would like to thank the discusser for his interest in the
paper. His comments on the analysis and repair of the contin-
uous 45° skew voided-slab bridge in Australia contribute sig-
nificantly to the value of our paper. The failure at the obtuse
corners of that bridge is not surprising. Very likely it is due
to the direction of the transverse reinforcement in the top and
bottom of the slab. The transverse reinforcement was placed
in the skew direction. Several investigations by Kennedy
(1983) have shown that when transverse reinforcement is
placed nonnal to the bridge centerline, not only does it sig-
nificantly increase the bridge stiffness, but it also prevents or
reduces considerably the possibility of cracking at the obtuse
corners. The repair job on the bridge suggested by the dis-
cusser with external plates glued to the soffit at the obtuse
corners and nonnal to the centerline is certainly the correct
approach.
APPENDIX. REFERENCE
Kennedy, J. B. (1983). "Orientation of ribs in waffle-slab skew bridges."
J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 109(3), Sll-816.
'Leet., Struct. Engrg. Dept., Alexandria Univ., Egypt.
'Univ. Distinguished Prof., Dept. of Civ. and Envir. Engrg., Univ. of
Windsor, Windsor, Ont., Canada N9B 3P4.