Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-020-00406-9

RESEARCH PAPER

Experimental and Finite Element Analysis of Precast Reinforced

Concrete U‑Shaped Box Culvert
Gebremedhn Zenagebriel1 · Jilong Li1 · Guofu Qiao1

Received: 27 May 2019 / Accepted: 4 April 2020

© Shiraz University 2020

Abstract
This paper presents the experimental and finite element analysis of parametric research of precast reinforced concrete
U-shaped box culvert subject to loading conditions at the roof and both sidewalls of the culvert through beam support steel
bar. This culvert was investigated based on two ways. Firstly, the experiment was tested with seventeen different trial load
tests with four controlling load trials. The variables in the test including the deflection and crack width were presented and
interpreted. The test specimen result showed similar crack patterns with respect to the initiation and propagation as well as the
load–deflection plot. Generally, the initial superficial flexural cracks occurred on the roof, floor slab, and sidewalls directly.
Flexural cracks continued to occur in these places throughout the testing. This paper proposes a series of crack sensors in
contact with the culvert to completely meet the requirements of the culverts, and their carrying capacity due to sensing per-
formance. Secondly, the finite element method was used to analyze the structural behaviors and crack strains of the standard
three-dimensional U-shaped box culverts under different loading conditions using brick elements in ABAQUS-V6.14-4
software. The culvert was modeled using three-dimensional solid elements for concrete and wire elements for reinforcement
being geometric and material linearity besides the reinforcement was modeled as rebar elements embedded in the surface
elements. Finally, the typical load–deflection plots obtained from the experiments are compared with those obtained from
finite element modeling analyses and the effects of with and without distribution reinforcement on the culvert are insignificant.

Keywords  Finite element analysis · Finite element modeling · Precast reinforced culvert · U-shape box culvert

1 Introduction alternative for replacing the deteriorating short section and

A culvert is a mini version of a bridge since it performs simi-
lar tasks for the conveyance of natural surface water drainage
limited flow under roads, taxiways, runways or railroads.
Culverts have been used where the site conditions and loads
acting upon them were appropriate. In recent times, the sew-
ers were usually formed by precast reinforced concrete. Due
to its large overall rigidity and simple construction, it has
good adaptability to uneven subsidence of foundations. Its
concrete must be a strong, safe, stiff, reliable and economical
* Gebremedhn Zenagebriel
zencheboyy@gmail.com
Jilong Li
lijilong@hit.edu.cn; leekeelung@126.com
Guofu Qiao
qgf_forever@hit.edu.cn; qgfhit@163.com
1
School of Civil Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology,
Harbin 150090, China
elevation of the bridge (Ayush Tiwari 2017; Bingxin 2018;
Awwad et al. 2000; Garg and Abolmaali 2008; Mengna
2014; Shatnawi et al. 2017).
The culverts, however, generally differ from bridges
because the upper part of the sewer is not part of the traveled
road. The underground culverts are located in three general
locations: at the lower part of the depressions where there
is no natural watercourse, where natural currents cross the
road and in the places necessary to pass the surface drainage
that is transported inside the underlying ditches of streets
and entrances to the adjacent property. Although there are
a variety of styles and designs of underground culverts
in service, all the sewers can be classified into two basic
types: rigid (concrete) and flexible (steel). These classifica-
tions are based on the main difference in how the structural
loads are transported by the culvert and by the interrelation
between the structure of the culvert and the surrounding
soil. Rigid culverts are designed to resist bending moment;
flexible does not resist bending moment. Also, the culverts

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

are often described by their shape, which can be circular,
arched, elliptical or box. The shape of the box can be made
more rigid by rotating the inner walls of the fabric between
the upper and lower surfaces. Underground boxes composed
of two horizontal slabs and two vertical monolithic slabs
are economical because of their rigidity and the monolithic
action, and separate foundations are not necessary as the
lower slab which rests directly on the ground acts as a slab of
the raft. For small exhausts, a single-celled unloading chan-
nel is used and multi-cell ducts can be used for large drains.
The barrel of the underground canals must be long enough
to contain the road and the sidewalk. For an underground
box, the upper plate is necessary to withstand dead loads,
live loads of moving traffic, ground pressure in the side-
walls, water pressure from inside and pressure in the bottom
plate, in addition to the weight of the plate. Most modern
drains are made of corrugated metal, plastic or reinforced
concrete. Concrete ducts can be prefabricated or molded on-
site, which may be post-tensioned in the field. The advan-
tage of the precast concrete box culvert mainly focuses on
the construction of the main structure. The type of culvert
selected for use in a given location depends on the hydraulic
requirement and the strength required to sustain the weight
of a fill or of moving wheel loads. After these items have
been established, the selection is then largely a matter of
economics. Consideration must be given to the durability
and to the cost of the completed structure, including items
such as the cost of manufactured units and costs of the trans-
portation and installation. Maintenance costs should also be
considered in any overall comparison of the cost of different
culvert types. There are two major classes of culvert installa-
tion, which are based on the conditions that influence loads;
the first will be trenched, where culverts are placed in natural
ground or compacted fill with a controlled trench width and
the second is embankment, where culverts are usually placed
in the natural terrain, but they are covered by a built embank-
ment. The third method of installation for the placement of
underground ducts is drilling and sampling, which is used
when a deep installation is required or where conventional
open excavation is not practical. The position of the cul-
vert is defined as the selection of alignment and inclination
with respect to the road and to the flow. Proper location is
important because it influences the adequacy of the opening,
culvert maintenance, flood protection adjoining improve-
ment and possible washout of the roadway. Although every
sewage installation is unique, the few principles set out here
apply in most cases. The first principle of the sewer position
is to provide the flow with direct entry and direct exit. Any
abrupt change in direction at each end will delay the flow
and will require a large structure. The ideal slope line for an
underground channel is that which does not produce exces-
sive sedimentation or speed and sieving, one with the shorter
length and one that simplifies the substitution (Abolmaali
13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering
and Garg 2008; Abolmaali and Garg Anil 2008; Ahmed and
Alarabi 2011; Jianzhong 2018; Yijie 2016).
The construction link of the main structure of the cast in
place box culvert is all completed in the field, occupying a
large amount of field time. The main structure of the precast
concrete box culvert is made in the prefabricated component
factory. It can be carried out synchronously with the site cast
in place construction, and it does not occupy the site during
the construction period while the prefabricated component
hoisting, assembling and connected parts anti-corrosion
processing are more efficient in the construction period.
These structures include the prefabricated sewer reinforced
concrete box. The most commonly used type is precast rein-
forced concrete box culvert due to reduced construction time
and maintenance cost; especially it is preferable when the
concrete batching plant is not near to construction sites. Pre-
cast box culverts are not recommended for areas with exces-
sive settlement where deep foundations are required since
deep foundations would have to be placed on shorter inter-
vals with use of prefabricated sections making the installa-
tion excessively expensive (Alkhrdaji and Nanni 2001; Garg
Anil et al. 2007; Shatnawi et al. 2017; Shiguang 2018).
Currently, the maximum inner span length of a standard
precast box culvert is 3.5 m based on the Chinese standard
building code. This span length is sometimes too small to
handle heavy water flow which may require the use of mul-
tiple sections placed side by side. In this case, the walls of
adjacent ducts will act as a spring which can hinder flow and
is associated with flooding problems. Therefore, developing
new box sections with 4.0 m inner span length could prove
to be an economical alternative to multiple sections. Fur-
thermore, this paper will present the finite element analysis
results of precast reinforced concrete U-shaped box culvert
subject to loading conditions(JC/T2456 2018; Mengna 2014;
Wei 2013).
The precast concrete U-shaped box culverts are made
from a combination range  of spans and rises. A typical
cross-section of the U-shaped box culvert is shown in Fig. 1.
U-shaped box culvert is formed from two non-symmetrical
U-shaped culverts jointed using steel strain. The spigot is
placed into the bell end; because of this, it may cause verti-
cal and lateral load increment. Therefore, there is a need to
investigate the safety and stability by checking crack and
deflection and to determine structural ductility and deforma-
tion capacity of the U-shaped box culvert under the vertical
and lateral test load at each control point.
In recent years, much research has been done on experi-
mental and finite element analysis of box culvert. Some
of the investigations (Crisfield 1986) studied whether the
pressure and pressure response can also be predicted by
cracking concrete structures in addition to shell failure.
Tarhini and Frederick (2004) conducted a parametric study
for the multi-lane single-span reinforced concrete slab
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering
Fig. 1  Measuring crack sensor and load test layout
bridge slabs. Marzouk et al. (2002) developed a numeri-
cal model to predict the punching load and deformations
of the reinforced concrete slabs. Despite the low tensile
strength of the concrete, Polak (2005) used three-dimen-
sional shell elements for punching and flexural analysis of
the reinforced concrete slabs.
Against this background, this paper presents an experi-
mental study and finite element analysis in which a large
non-symmetrical U-shaped forming box culvert was tested
with seventeen trials of different load test applied on the
roof and both sidewalls of the precast U-shaped box cul-
vert through beam support steel bar for load transport
and twelve crack sensors were installed for measuring
the crack width, corner measuring, and deflection versus
each applied load. The load was used as control and was
checked in four trial tests such as 7, 9, 12 and 17 trials.
Furthermore, the finite element model is used to simu-
late the numerical solution of the structural behaviors and
crack strains of the standard three-dimensional U-shaped
box culvert under different loading conditions using brick
elements in ABAQUS-V6.14-4 software (Wang Shuhong
et al. 2018).
2 Experimental Program
2.1 Test Specimen and Material Properties
A full-scale experimental testing program was undertaken
to perform the test on one typical U-shaped box culvert des-
ignated and molded technically based on GB50010 (2010).
Precast U-shaped box culvert includes span length 4.80 m,
outer size rise of 4.80 m, width 1.5 m and thickness 0.4 m.
Components are made from two U-shaped structures with
2.52/2.28 m × 4.8 m × 1.5 m, as well as strong concrete C40
based on China standard (GB50204 2015) and reinforcement
strength level 400HRB based on China standard (GB1499.1
2008, GB13788 2008) under consideration of possible load-
ing conditions. The U-shaped box is made from the two non
symmetrical u-shaped structures and fixed using four steel
strains vertically as well as eight steel strains horizontally to
make longitudinal box culvert (Alkhrdaji and Nanni 2001;
GB1449.2 2007, 2008; GB50010 2010; GB50204 2015;
Shatnawi et al. 2017; Shenglong 2015).
The box culvert is reinforced/deformed steel welded wire
reinforcement (Garg and Abolmaali 2008). These reinforcing
13

layers are proportioned to resist the calculated moments and
thrusts in the member’s sections.
2.2 Test Setup and Instrumentation
The U-shaped box culvert was cast  in the Heilongjiang
Zhongxin LuQiao Material Limited Company and tested
in  Harbin Institute of Technology-Key Laboratory of
Structures Dynamic Behavior and Control based on China
standard GB/T16752-2010. GB/T16752 (2010). A steel bar
testing frame was designed and fabricated to have a flex-
ible arrangement for load position in the plan and in height,
which consisted of two steel bar columns spaced at 200 cm
in the East–West direction for the applied vertical load. The
frame was fixed with bolts embedded in the reaction floor
HW350 × 350 steel bar beam. Beams were stiffened at both
ends of the beam. The stiffener is arranged in the span total
of 5 stiffeners. A 484.6 kN capacity load was placed on the
top of the load plate and the lateral load located on upper
and lower part of each sidewall, also 178 kN and 312 kN
for producing stress state in the culvert which would yield
to the most critical condition and is controlled by pressure
load control gauge as shown in Fig. 2.
The instrumentation generally consists of applied loads
(electronic load cell), crack sensors, corner measuring point
sensors, pressure load control gauges, and data acquisition
units such as laptop computer, instrument converter and
cable extension. On the other hand, there are twelve crack
sensors for displacement (instrument 1-12), which were
placed at the twelve different specified locations, two rota-
tion sensors (instrument 3, 9) were laid out at roof mid-span
and bottom mid-span, and two corner measuring point sen-
sors (instrument 6, 12) were laid out at mid-span of both
sidewalls of the U-shaped box culverts. Furthermore, the
major function of the instrument converter was collecting
data from the twelve sensors using cable extension and
Fig. 2  Typical test setup and instrumentation
13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering
converting it to the laptop computer for providing the appro-
priate result of the U-shaped box culvert (Fig. 3).
In general, the experimental test had four controlling load
trials: 7,9,12 and 17 trials. The load used 59% in trial 7,
74% in trial 9, 100% in trial 12, 148% in trial 17. Such load
was selected based on the observations during the initial
testing phase which indicated that the experimental load
versus deflection plots suffered from stiffness degradation.
The distance load applied is the most critical section which
was placed at a distance less than the load distance applied,
part of the load is directly transferred to the adjoining wall
without causing shear stress, and shear stress was reduced
in the roof and sidewall as well as floor wall. Also, when the
load plate was placed beyond the distance, the load applied
to the shear stresses on the near wall was reduced and caused
more bending moment. Thus, each test was performed with
the assistance of a minimum of eight persons from both
school researchers and factory workers. While testing, to
ensure consistency between the tests, a method was used for
identifying crack initiations (Garg 2007; GB/T50082 2009).
After a crack was initiated, a red marker was used to draw a
line parallel to the crack in addition to scribing each event
of each test load as shown in Fig. 4.
2.3 General Test Observation and Analysis
In the load test conducted, the load plate was placed on
the roof slab and sidewall panel of the culvert through
Fig. 3  Data collection unit
Fig. 4  Crack monitoring process
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

the beam support steel bar. The major events during the 18
experiment and finite element modeling are presented in 16 Roof midspan deflection
Table 1. The test specimen exhibited similar crack patterns Floor midspan deflection
14 Left side plate deflection
with respect to the initiation and propagation as well as
Right side plate deflection
load deflection plot. Generally, the initial superficial flex- 12
ural cracks occurred on the roof, floor slab, and sidewalls

Deflection (mm)
10
directly at trial number 5 load of 125 kN and also the trial
8
number 17 load of 464 kN, final flexural cracks initiated
on the roof, floor slab and sidewalls of the culvert due to 6
not exceed bending moment, the final failure of the test 4
specimen not damaged (Abolmaali and Garg Anil 2008;
2
Kim et al. 2011).
In the present study, the load–deflection plots for roof 0
slab left side, floor slab, right side, and load–deflection -2
correspondent are shown below as per GB50010-2010, 20.03% 50.10% 74.33% 100% 130.22%
and the maximum experimental deflection is at right side Load (%)
mid-span plate with 16.64 mm at trial test number 17.
Furthermore, the left, right side panel, floor slab and roof Fig. 5  Load deflection plot
slab deflected inward during the experimental load test of
the U-shaped box culvert (Figs. 5, 6).
Finally, the summary of the experimental test results is 3 Results and Discussion
presented; the crack was forecasted 0.30 mm at the load
trial test number 12 and the obtained first crack width The actual U-shaped box culvert may be in complicated
observation is 0.26 mm, the second crack width obser- boundary conditions, geometry dimension and material
vation 0.18 mm, and the third crack width observation mechanical properties. So it is more effective to use numeri-
0.24  mm which is less than the forecasted crack. This cal simulation in the analysis deformation of the U-shaped
means the specimen has good stiffness than the design box culvert. In this paper, the finite element method was
specimen; besides the first shear crack was detected at a used in simulating the process of the deflection or deflec-
load of 125 kN trial test number 5, and the maximum shear tion distribution of the U-shaped box culvert subject to
cracks detected was 0.60 mm during the first observed loading operations was simulated, and the influence of the
crack width point at a load of 464 kN trial test number 17. model parameter was analyzed for the section deflection or
deflection (Kyungsik and Chai 2005). In order to study the

Table 1  Experimental datasheet
0.6
Events Load (KN) First crack width observation
Second crack width observation
7 9 12 17 0.5 Third crack width observation

Roof load (KN) 300 300 500 750

0.4
Lateral load (KN) 105 105 178 263
Crack (mm)

Side load (KN) 184 184 312 464

Load (%) 58.97% 74.33% 100% 148.72% 0.3

First crack width observation 0.02 0.14 0.26 0.60

(mm) 0.2
Second crack width observation 0.10 0.10 0.18 0.31
(mm) 0.1
Third crack width observation 0.02 0.12 0.24 0.58
(mm)
0.0
Roof mid-span deflection (mm) 0.16 0.20 0.38 0.55
20.03% 50.10% 74.33% 100% 130.22%
Floor mid-span deflection (mm) 0.17 0.21 1.50 1.30
Load (%)
Left-side plate deflection (mm) 2.55 3.21 5.74 12.56
Right-side plate deflection (mm) 3.66 4.61 7.17 16.64
Fig. 6  Load crack plot

13

behavior of all the possible standard U-shaped box culverts,
a three-dimensional finite element model was prepared for
the standard size of U-shaped box culverts as per GB50010-
2010. This study model has included three dimensional solid
(C3D4) elements for concrete and three-dimensional wire
(T3D2) Reinforcement elements with geometric linearity
and material. The reinforcement was modeled as built-in
rebar elements in the surface element. The U-shaped box
was loaded on an area of 35 cm × 150 cm. The incremen-
tal load was applied on the roof and sidewall up to load of
464 kN, the load in which the test specimens failed during
the experimental testing. The cracking strain was studied
for all the load steps of U-shaped boxes tested using brick
(C3D4) elements (Systèmes 2014). The amount of plastic
strain needed to reduce the stresses to zero at the crack which
is used to stiffness model. The elements cracked at specified
load levels were identified by using the cracking strain value
(Abolmaali and Garg Anil 2008).
3.1 Material Property
Because of the absence of some material property data,
the properties parameter of the U-shaped box culvert con-
crete was calculated by finite element modeling analysis.
This method based on the observational property data was
used to gain deformation or deflection of the culvert section
from the finite element modeling analysis, and results were
reasonable because the ABAQUS was used to model and
analyze the finite element (Garg 2007; Liu et al. 2008). The
deformation or deflection of the culvert was calculated when
the culvert has applied a load on six parts of the U-shaped
box culvert which is located two on both sidewall and two
on the roof part of the culvert totally six loading places. The
corresponding deformation diagram was obtained. The box
culvert is considered its elastic modules deformation can be
neglected because the elastic modulus of the U-shaped box
culvert deformation or deflection of the culvert is observed.
The culvert width is 1.5 m per section. Material parameters
of concrete and reinforcement were defined using standard
properties. Modulus of elasticity, Poisson’s ratio, density,
tensile and comprehensive strength standard value were
incorporated as the basic material parameters of the mod-
eling as per GB50010-2010 shown in Table 2.
The U-shaped box culvert consisted of two split U-shaped
box culvert and assembled tip at the end of the bell and fix
them using M 45 screw bolt on the site. So that the single
box culvert detailed section size of the modeling and analyz-
ing as shown in Table 3.
3.2 Embedded Element
The elements of the finite element modeling were classi-
fied into five: such as solid, thick shell, brick, surface, and
13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering
Table 2  Basic material parameters of the modeling
Item no. Modulus Poisson’s Density Tensile Compre-
of elastic- ratio (kg/m3) strength hensive
ity (MPa) standard strength
value standard
(MPa) value
(MPa)
Concrete 3.25E4 0.2 2400 2.39 26.8
Rein- 2E5 0.2 7850 400 400
force-
ment
embedded element. Thus, the embedded element technique
is used to have embedded nodes at the desired location with
the constraints on translation degrees of freedom on the
embed element by the host element. Both the rebar cages are
modeled as embedded region concrete using constraints in
the interaction module, and making the concrete the host. In
addition to this, the rebar element can only have translation/
rotations equal to those of the host elements that surround
them (Garg 2007). The parts used in the finite element model
of this study are presented in Fig. 7, which consist of precast
U-shaped box culvert concrete embedded reinforcement.
It is considered that there is no bond-slip between the
reinforcement and the concrete and the whole simulation
process satisfies the projectile plastic and linearity. The
reinforcement is embedded in concrete by using embedded
reinforcement after richening the standard value 400Mpa
of the comprehensive strength. The assembly and position-
ing process of the components of the upper and lower two
parts of the box culvert is completed in the modeling, and
the constraint relationship is passed. Connect up and down
two parts together because of the actual structure, and the
sidewall is fastened by pre-stressed steel strand. In the form,
the deflection will not be produced at the interface, so it will
be up and down in the finite element analysis process. The
two parts of the connection are defined as the upper and
lower outer edge articulation of the edge of the interface as
shown in Fig. 7.
3.3 Mesh Generation
The U-shaped box culvert section was considered in the
mesh generation, and it was regarded as a three-dimen-
sional solid elements for U-shaped box culvert, and three-
dimensional wire elements reinforcement as shown in Fig. 7.
The three dimensional solid elements concrete (C3D4) and
three-dimensional wire elements reinforcement (T3D2) have
meshed separately. The models were tested for confirming
the geometry dimension and the mesh density. Thus, the
final model has given deflection using node point identifi-
cation which is located four outside eight inside node point
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering
Table 3  Single box culvert Inner size (m) Width (m)
section size
4 × 4 4 4 (2.12/1.88)
Fig. 7  U-shaped box culvert concrete embedded reinforcement
Fig. 8  Mesh of U-shaped box culvert concrete
identification. The four-point identification also located two
left and two on the right side of the U-shaped box culvert
and also the eight-point identification also located three on
the roof, three on the floor, one right and one on the left side
of the U-shaped box culvert. The mesh element was gener-
ated on the U-shaped box culvert section as shown in Fig. 8.
In addition to this, the mesh node generated on the
U-shaped box culvert with the total mesh generates 81,866
elements and 20,385 nodes (Liu et al. 2008).
3.4 Load Applications
The analysis step was set with 1.5 s time period adjusted the
loading time by post-processing. The boundary condition
of the calculation results at a specific time can be observed,
and the test corresponds to the test which is the two rigid
connections at the bottom, and the load is applied to the roof
slab and both sidewall panels. The load is kept uniformly on
Height (m) Length (m) Thickness
Roof (m) Floor (m) Side wall (m)
1.5 0.4 0.4 0.4
Fig. 9  Typical diagram of load location
the structure (Ha-Won Song et al. 2008). The load position
is the same as that of the test as shown in Fig. 9.
3.5 Shape Model
Based on ABAQUS, a three-dimensional finite element
model of U-shaped box culvert including reinforcement is
established. The assembling of the modeled elements firstly
created the elements separately, assign materials, embedded
reinforcement by concrete, applied a load on the specified
location, specify boundary condition of the model, a mesh
of the parts of the model separately, and submit the job to
final analysis. So the output database files in ABAQUS were
read by visualization module to create contour plots, anima-
tions, XY plots, and tabular output of the results. Crack is
not compatible with the display mode so that it is read in
the data file, which identifies the cracked elements and the
level of stress at that point. Alternatively, strain contour is
plotted in the visualization mode with the limits of crack-
ing: compressive and tensile strains (Jie 2007; Jun-ai 2008;
Systèmes 2014).
The typical deflection shape of the U-shaped box culvert
consists of two modelings. One is solid which formed during
the applied load, and the other one is also wireframe which
is un-deformed showing its original modeling presented
(Fig. 10).
Upon the application of the load, through the load cross
beam plate, on the outside face of the top slab and sidewall
panel at a certain distance, the U-shaped box undergoes
deflection. The sidewall panel and floor slabs deflect inward,
but the top slab deflects up the ward of the U-shaped box.
The above figure shows the deformed shape (solid) com-
pared to the undeformed shape (wireframe) of U-shaped box
13
 Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

Fig. 10  Deflection Shape of the U-shaped box culvert Fig. 11  S11 stress U-shaped box culvert concrete

culvert, at the lateral load of 178 kN and load of 312 kN on

the sidewall panel and a vertical load of 500 kN.

3.6 Smeared Crack Model

The two approaches are common to the modeling of concrete

cracking: the discreet crack and the smeared crack models.
The smeared crack model is position limiters in the crack
band model, which refers to the dimension of the element
with the concrete constitutive law so that the energy of the
Fig. 12  S11 stress U-shaped box culvert reinforcement
fracture is independent of the size of the element. When
adopting the crack band model, the discreet crack pattern
and the stained crack pattern yield approximately the same
results if the crack opening displacement wt in the crack
discrete pattern is taken as cracking strain εcr Accumulated
on the width hc of the crack band in a model of crack spotted
(Chen et al. 2011; Bažant and Planas 1998).

∫ (1)
wt = hc 𝜀cr dhc

In the finite element model presented in this document, the

U-shaped box culvert will have failed in its bond when the
load arrived more than 250 kN because the load is more
than the maximum load during FEM. The stress diagram
of the structure under the normal use limit state control,
the load capacity limit state control load and the maximum
control load are observed to get the stress on the surface
of the plate along the direction of its span, the observation
side plate. The S11 stress represents the roof and floor slab
(See Fig. 11), the S11 stress represents reinforcement for
U-shaped box culvert with and without compression rein-
forcement distribution shown insignificant (see Fig. 12), and
the S22 stress represents the side wall panel of the stress
U-shaped box culvert (see Fig.  13). The stress diagram
includes the distribution of concrete stress in axile at the
lower side of the control load, and the distribution diagram
of the concrete stress at the axile at the upper of the roof and
the reinforcement framework should be made.
Fig. 13  S22 stress U-shaped box culvert reinforced concrete
3.7 Definition of Tensile Damage
In the finite element model, a user-defined damage curve is
employed to account for the progressive degradation of con-
crete as the cracks widen (Hordijk 1991). The stress leveling
curve was proposed based on a wide range of concrete ten-
sile strength tests or the concrete under uniaxial stress. Sub-
sequently (Jendele and Cervenka 2006), this model is also
used in this study for defining the tensile stress–strain curve.
If the concrete is not damaged after entering the softening
field (εt > ft/Ec), The discharge path of the voltage-deflection
curve has a slope equal to Ec, and the corresponding elastic
el
tension εt,d  = σt/Ec, where σt is The traction tension in the
concrete. If the concrete is damaged because of cracking, the

13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering

slope of the unloading path is reduced to (1 − dt)Ec, and the
corresponding elastic strain εelt,d = σt/[(1 − dt)Ec] where dt is
the tensile damage factor of cracked concrete.
In ABAQUS, one method to define tensile damage is to
assume that εplt  = 0for all post cracking values σt, indicat-
ing that the discharge path of the deformation curve passes
through the origin coordinate system. The crack width
caused by the equivalent plastic strain εpl t can be obtained as:
d t 𝜎t h c
pl
wt = wt −
1 − dt Ec
and the preceding assumption εpl pl
t  = 0 is equivalent to εt   = 0.
pl
When εt  = 0, can be deduced from Eq. (2) so that the tensile
damage factor of cracked concrete dt can be given as:
wt
dt =
[wt + (hc 𝜎t )∕Ec ]
Finally, the crack width caused by the equivalent plastic
strain εpl
t can be obtained 0.30 mm with a load of 312 kN and
the tensile damage factor of cracked concrete also 1. This
means the design specimen has good stiffness.
or vertical deflection of each point to the center of the
box culvert is obtained by loading the box culvert on the
loading location. The finite element analysis data sheet is
shown in Table 4.
Finally, Fig. 15 presents the comparisons of finite ele-
ment modeling versus experimental results, for U-shaped
box culvert with and without compression reinforcement
distribution, showed that insignificant. This comparison
was made with respect to the load–deflection plot. The
(2) finite element modeling and experimental deflection were
shown at controlling trial number 7,9,12 and 17. The first
deflection detected at trial test number 2 and the average
maximum also detected with 2.06 mm and 14.60 mm at
a load of 464 kN trial test number 17 on the right and
left side plate of the box culvert. On the other hand, the
experimental deflection was higher than the finite element
(3)
modeling deflection with 12.54 mm because the finite ele-
ment modeling and the experimental are linear and non-
linear relationships.
Table 4  Finite element analysis datasheet

Events Load (KN)

3.8 Comparison of Finite Element Modeling
7 9 12 17
and Experimental Results
Roof load (KN) 300 300 500 750
The comparison between finite element modeling and exper- Lateral load (KN) 105 105 178 263
imental results for crack initiation and crack propagation Side load (KN) 184 184 312 464
showed a close correlation. The predictions of the cracks Load (%) 58.97% 58.97% 100% 148.72%
by finite element modeling analysis were close to those Roof mid-span deflection (mm) 0.18 0.20 0.38 0.55
observed in the experiments for the particular level of the Floor mid-span deflection (mm) 0.08 0.08 0.14 0.12
load and the position of the crack (Garg, 2007; Garg Anil Left-side plate deflection (mm) 0.83 1.03 1.39 2.06
and Abolmaali 2009). The prediction of the crack obtained Right-side plate deflection (mm) 0.83 1.03 1.39 2.06
from the modeling analysis of the finished elements for the
U-shaped box culvert is presented in Fig. 14.
The deflection control section is applied to the inner 16
edge of the roof mid-span plate, the inner span of the floor
14 FEM Side Plate Deflection
mid-span plate, and the left and right side junction of the
Experimental Side Plate Deflection
top and bottom parts of the sewer box. The deflection 12

10
Deflection (mm)

-2
0 100 200 300 400 500
Load (KN)
Fig. 14  Typical Contours for Cracking (Cracked Region: yellow
color) Fig. 15  The comparison of FEM versus experimental data

13

4 Conclusions
This study developed the experimental and finite element
modeling analysis study on the precast reinforced U-shaped
box culvert. The main test variables included the width of
the slit and deflection as well as with and without compres-
sion distribution reinforcement. Based on interpretations and
discussions of the test results, the major findings are sum-
marized as follows:
1. Experimental tests showed that the flexion ruled the
behavior of the sample GB50010-2010 factor load. For
the test specimen, the flexural cracks formed initially
on the inside face of the floor slab and junction of the
sidewall mid-span besides outside face of all haunches,
which is extended to the joint. Flexural cracks were
observed firstly at trial load no. 5 loads of 125 kN and
finally trial number 17 loads of 464 kN. However, the
cracks predicted by such a finite element model are still
inaccurate owing to the perfect bond assumption made
for U-shaped box culvert.
2. Based on finite element analysis, the final failure for the
test specimen was due to bond failure at the mid-span
of the sidewall when the load arrived more than 250 kN,
whereas the specimen under the experimental load test
did not fail because the applied load was smaller than
the ultimate load.
3. The comparison of the test results under the finite ele-
ment analysis, for with and without compression distri-
bution reinforcement showed that the effect of the com-
pression distribution reinforcement in the box culvert is
insignificant.
4. The comparison between finite element modeling and
experimental results for deflection gives higher results
on the experimental because the finite element modeling
and the experimental are linear and non-linear relation-
ships.
Acknowledgements  This research was supported by the National
Key Basic Research Program of China (973 Program CSC No.
2016GXZ133) and Heilongjiang Zhongxin LuQiao Material Limited
Company.
References
Abolmaali A, Garg A (2008) Shear behavior and mode of failure for
ASTM C1433 precast box culverts. J Bridge Eng 13(4):331–338.
https​://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2008)13:4(331)
Abolmaali A, Garg Anil K (2008) Effect of wheel live load
on shear behavior of precast reinforced concrete box cul-
verts. J Bridge Eng 13(1):93–99. https ​ : //doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)1084-0702(2008)13:1(93)
13
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering
Ahmed AOM, Alarabi E (2011) Development formulation for struc-
tural design of concrete box culverts. Pract Period Struct Des
Constr 16(2):48–55. https​://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-
5576.00000​75
Alkhrdaji T, Nanni A (2001) Design, construction, and field-testing
of an RC box culvert bridge reinforced with GFRP bars. Non-
Metallic Reinforcement for Concrete Structrues-FRPRCS-5,
Cambridge
Awwad E, Mabsout M, Sadek S, Tarhini K (2000) Finite element analy-
sis of concrete box culverts. In: Paper presented at the eighth
international conference on computing in civil and building engi-
neering (ICCCBE-VIII) Stanford, California, United States
Ayush Tiwari SSB (2017) Cost comparison of RCC girder and PSC
girder. IJSRD-Int J Sci Res Dev 5(09):67–69
Bažant ZP, Planas J (1998) Fracture and size effect in concrete and
other quasibrittle materials. CRC Press, London
Bingxin XBG (2018) Box culvert finite element analysis and internal
force diagram. J Disaster Prevent Mitigation 34(2):92–96. https​
://doi.org/10.13693​/j.cnki.cn21-1573.2018.02.017 (in Chinese)
Chen GM, Teng JG, Chen JF, ASCE (2011) Finite-element modeling of
intermediate crack debonding in FRP-plated RC beams. J Compos
Constr 15(3):339–353. https​://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-
5614.00001​57
Crisfield MA (1986) Snap-through and snap- back response in concrete
structures and the dangers of under-integration. Int J Numer Meth
Eng 22:751–767
Garg AK (2007) Experimental and finite element based investigations
of shear behavior in reinforced concrete box culverts. (Disserta-
tion), University of Texas at Arlington, USA. Retrieved from https​
://rc.libra​ry.uta.edu/uta-ir/handl​e/10106​/637
Garg A, Abolmaali K (2008) Effect of wheel live load on shear behav-
ior of precast reinforced concrete box culverts. J Bridge Eng
13(1):93–99
Garg Anil K, Abolmaali A (2009) Finite-element modeling and analy-
sis of reinforced concrete box culverts. J Transp Eng 135(3):121–
128. https:​ //doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2009)135:3(121)
Garg Anil K, Abolmaali A, Fernandez R (2007) Experimental inves-
tigation of shear capacity of precast reinforced concrete box
culverts. J Bridge Eng 12(4):511–517. https​://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)1084-0702(2007)12:4(511)
GB T50082 (2009) Standard for test methods of long term performance
and durability of ordinary concrete. Publishing Peaple Republic of
China Drawing Standard GB, Beijing (in Chinese)
GB/T16752 (2010) Test methods of concrete and reinforced concrete
sewer pipes. Publishing House of building Industry in China, Bei-
jing (in Chinese)
GB1449.2 (2007) Hot-rolled ribbed steel bars for reinforced concrete.
Publishing House of building Industry in China, Beijing (in
Chinese)
GB1499.1 (2008) Steel for reinforced concrete-hot rolled round bars.
Publishing House of building Industry in China, Beijing (in
Chinese)
GB50010GB50010 (2010) Code for design concrete structures. Pub-
lishing House of building Industry in China, Beijing (in Chinese)
GB50204 (2015) Code for acceptance of construction quality of con-
crete structure. Publishing House of building Industry in China,
Beijing (in Chinese)
Ha-Won Song S-HN, Kim Sang-Hyo, Lee June-Hee (2008) Path
dependent failure analysis of RC shell structures using volume
control technique. Eng Struct 30(12):3523–3531
Hordijk DA (1991) Local approach to fatigue of concrete. (Dissera-
tion), Delft Univ. of Technology, Holland
JC/T2456 (2018) Precast concrete box culvert. Beijing, China: China
Concrete and Cement Products (in Chinese)
Jendele L, Cervenka J (2006) Finite element modelling of reinforce-
ment with bond. Comput Struct 84(28):1780–1791
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering
Jianzhong P (2018) Analysis of the structural design of the sluice
cover box. In: Shandong Industrial Technology, vol 21, pp 1–9
(in Chinese)
Jie S (2007) Large-section pipe shed Numerical simulation of box cul-
vert structure with box culvert jacking. Henan Sci 03:457–460
(in Chinese)
Jun-ai JU, W Z-Q (2008) Finite element analysis and internal force cal-
culation of reinforced concrete box culvert structure. Build Tech
Dev 35(03):6–8 (in Chinese)
Kim D, Kim S, Willmer JL, Leo E (2011) A case history and finite
element modeling of a culvert failure. Geo-Frontiers. https​://doi.
org/10.1061/41165​(397)168
Kyungsik K, Chai HY (2005) Design loading on deeply buried box
culverts. J Geotech Eng 131(1):20–27
Liu X, Cen G, Wang X, Liu Y (2008) Settlement prediction and FEM
analysis of culvert section under high-filled embankment. In:
Paper presented at the international pipelines conference
Marzouk H, Osman M, Hussein A (2002) Punching shear of slabs:
crack size and size effects. Mag Concr Res 54:13–21
Mengna L (2014) Finite element structure analysis of underground box
culvert (in Chinese). (Disseration), Zhengzhou University China
Polak MA (2005) Shell finite element analysis of RC plates supported
on columns for punching shear and flexure. Int J Comput-Aided
Eng Softw 22(4):409–428
Shatnawi A, Almasabha G, Tarawneh B (2017) Structural behavior of
concrete box culverts under deep burial. J Pipeline Syst Eng Pract
8(4):25. https​://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.00002​91
Shenglong C (2015) Technical handbook of precast concrete pipes and
precast concrete culverts technology. Publ House Build Ind Soc
Beijing 1(1):42–62 (in Chinese)
Shiguang A. W. W. h. G. S. Y. H. Y. B. H. (2018) Brief analysis of
design and production of prefabricated box culverts in integrated
pipe Gallery. Concr World/China Concr (05)
Systèmes D (2014) Abaqus/CAE users guide. from https​://www.pdfdr​
ive.com/abaqu​scae-users​-guide​-e3346​6829.html
Tarhini KM, Frederick GR (1992) Wheel load distribution in I-girder
highway bridges. J Struct Eng 118(5):1285–1294. https​://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1992)118:5(1285)
Wang Shuhong AJ, Rula Jie, Pengyu Wang, Weihua Liu (2018) Imu-
lation of force performance of precast rectangular box culvert
and its potential failure mode. J Northeastern Univ (Nat Sci)
02:260–265
Wei W (2013) Research on design technology of composite culvert
frame combination culvert structure. Xinjiang University
Yijie FSOYWD (2016) Development and application prospect of pre-
cast prestressed concrete box culvert. China Concrete and Cement
Products (10)
13