Analysis of RCC skew box girder bridge

Preeti Agarwal1, P. Pal2 & P. K. Mehta3

Department of Civil Engineering, MNNIT Allahabad, U.P., 211004, India
gotopreetiagarwal@gmail.com1, prpal@mnnit.ac.in2, pradeep11@mnnit.ac.in3

Abstract: This paper presents an evaluation of bending moment and shear force in interior and exterior girders of simply supported normal
and skew single cell reinforced cement concrete box girder bridge. Bending moment and shear force due to combined dead load and IRC
class- A wheel load are evaluated from finite element analysis. A total of 56 bridges numerical models are selected and analysis using SAP
2000 v.14.0.0 finite element software. To test the validity of the work, present results are validated by reported literature. A convergence
study is also performed on bridge to ensure reliable results. Design parameters are identified and their influence on bending moment and
shear force studied. The influence of skew on bending moment and shear force are investigated. The presence of skew reduces the bending
moment and increases the shear force in both girders of box girder bridge. The effect of skew angle less than 30̊ is ignored and analysed that
as straight bridge. The influence of other factors such as span, girder spacing, length-depth ratio are presented. It is observed that bending
moment of straight and skew bridges increases with span length and girder spacing but reduces with span- depth ratio. It is also concluded
that shear force increases with span- depth ratio except straight bridge and also increases with span length. Shear force is not sensitive to
girder spacing.

Keywords: Box girder bridge, RCC, Skew, Moment, Shear, FEM

1 Introduction
In the last few decades, bridges have been constructed due to the huge growth in traffic. The box girder bridge is
highly used in nowadays because of economy, aesthetic, torsional rigidity and capability of load distribution. Most of the
bridges are supported orthogonal to the traffic direction. The skewness in the bridge is defined as the inclination of abutments
to the normal of the traffic direction. Skew box girder bridges is one whose girders forms an any angle other than 90˚ with the
abutment. Presently skew bridges are mostly constructed where the problems of limitation of space and mountain territories are
occurred.
Extensive research are carried out in the area of skew bridges and few of them are presented below. Mehrain M. developed a
finite element programme to determine displacement and internal forces of composite girder bridges without diaphragm [1]. A
finite element method (FEM) was presented by Gustafson and wright for analysing skew composite girder bridge with
diaphragm [2]. Bakht some skew bridges (skew angle < 20˚) may be analysed as a straight bridges [3]. A FEM was used by
authors to determine equation of live load distribution factors (LDFs) for moment in continuous skew slab girder bridge due to
AASTHO truck loading. These equations was generated from parametric study on skew bridge and compared with AASTHO
standard specifications [4]. Helba and Kennedy derived the equations for the ultimate collapse loads of two span continuous
and simply supported skew composite bridges subjected to AASTHO truck loading [5, 6]. Barr et. al evaluated the effect load
type, skew angle, continuity and diaphragm on LDFs in prestressed concrete girder bridges using FEM [7]. Khaloo and
Mirzabozorg used FEM to evaluate the effect of intermediate diaphragm (ID) on LDFs for simply supported skew slab on
girder bridge. It was concluded that AASTHO code overestimate the value of LDFs in skew bridges because of the neglect the
effect of ID [8]. Field test and finite element analysis was carried out by Huang et. al for continuous slab on steel girder bridge
with a skew angle of 60˚ [9]. Load transfer mechanism of skew bridges are more difficult than straight bridge. In straight
bridge, the load path goes straight along the direction of span distribution. But in skew bridge, the load distribution pattern is
not same. In skew bridge the load tend to take a short way along obtuse corners of the bridge. This type of load transfer
mechanism reduce longitudinal moment, reaction, shear force near obtuse corner and low reaction and possibility of uplift at
acute corners.[10,11]. The effect of dynamic load on a continuous skew box girder bridge was studied via a FEM and validated
from the field testing [12, 13]. Gupta and Kumar conducted a literature review for structural behaviour of reinforced concrete
(RC) skew box girder bridge under static load, dynamic load and seismic load [14]. Also authors investigated the flexural
behaviours of a simply supported RC skew curved box girder bridge via FEM. A new skew curve coordinate system to find out
the critical position for IRC 70R tracked vehicle loading [15].
In this work, influence of skew angle of RC box girder bridge subjected to IRC class-A loading are investigated. RCC box
girder bridge with different skew angle, span length, girder spacing, length- depth ratio are analysed using FEM. The effect of
these parameter on bending moment (BM) and shear force (SF) in interior and exterior girders of skew RC box girder bridge
are studied.

2 Modelling Process and Validation

Modelling process is accepted, when it gives near results for the reported bridge models by different researchers. Gupta and
Kumar [15] model is chosen for validation. The authors used a box girder bridge. Shell element is used for modelling of single
cell Reinforced Cement Concrete (RCC) box girder bridges. Element is having four nodes with six degrees of freedom at each
node.
The model of box girder bridge is shown in Fig. 1. The singly supported box girder bridge having span of 27.4 m, width of
10.8 m and overall depth of 2.96 m. The bridge contains clear carriageway width is 10.4 m. The thickness of top and bottom
flange is 250 mm and 280 mm respectively and thickness of web is 360 mm. The material properties of concrete are: density=
25 kN/m2, modulus of elasticity= 2.5×107 kN/m2, characteristic strength= 25 MPa and poisson's ratio= 0.2.

Fig. 1 Cross section of box-girder bridge (dimensions are in meter )

The box girder bridge is simply supported. Pin support bearing is provided at left interior support and roller support bearing is
provided at remaining three support. The box girder bridge is analysed for dead load (DL) and Indian Road Congress (IRC)
[18] 70R tracked vehicle live load (LL) which is applied at a minimum distance clear spacing of 1.2 m from the kerb. The
mesh size of shell element is 20 cm in longitudinal and transverse direction. The skew angle of the bridge is varied from 0̊ to
50̊ at an interval of 10̊ is introduced at both support. The Absolute Bending Moment (ABM) due to dead load and live load in
both girders are determined and compared. Fig. 2 and 3 shows the ABM due to DL and LL of box girder bridge having
different skew angle shown in outer and inner girders respectively.

For dead load For live load

Fig. 2 Absolute bending moment having different skew angle in outer girder

For dead load For live load

Fig. 3 Absolute bending moment having different skew angle in inner girder
The present outcomes are compared and found with in close agreement with the reported results by Gupta and Kumar.
It is observed that the ABM due to DL is decreases with increase of skew angle in both girders but ABM due to LL, increase in
outer girder but decrease in inner girder. Hence the modelling procedure considered, may be extended to the further study.

3 Model of Box Girder Bridge

In this section, typical simply supported, single span, two lane box girder bridge are considered in this investigation. In order to
examine the effect of skewness on the behaviour of box girder bridge deck is studies by different span length, girder spacing
and length-depth ratio. In the present investigation deck width is 11.5 m, the thickness of web, top and bottom flange is 0.3 m.
The bridge contains 0.5 m kerb and 1.5 m footpath on both sides, which results in the clear carriageway width is 7.5 m. Fig. 4
shows the model of box girder bridge. The material properties of concrete which is used in all bridge models are: poisson’s
ratio=0.2, characteristic strength=40 MPa, density= 24 kN/m2, modulus of elasticity= 3.16×107 kN/m2. The material properties
of reinforcement is: density= 77 kN/m2, yield strength= 500 Mpa, ultimate strength= 545 MPa, modulus of elasticity= 2×108
kN/m2.

Fig. 4. Model of bridge deck system (dimensions are in meter)

In this paper, the finite element model for box girder bridge is developed using SAP 2000 v.14.0.0 [19]. Longitudinal girders
and slabs are modelled with SHELL element. This element have four nodes and six degrees of freedom at each node. The box
girder bridge is designed for DL and 2 lane IRC class-A wheel load, which is considered at a minimum clearance of 0.15 m
from the footpath near to interior girder. For all box girder bridge model, two bearings have been considered under each web.
The bearing at one end of the bridge has been considered as roller supported. For another end of the bridge, pin support
bearing is considered to simulate simply support condition.

3.1 Convergence Study

A convergence study determines the refinement needed to provide the nearest solution. To determine the real behaviour of the
bridge, more elements are require. A convergence study provides the size of element required to achieve the minimum error to
determine the maximum deflection of non-skew single cell box girder bridge. From Fig 5, result converges at the mesh size is
100 mm in longitudinal and transverse direction. Mesh size of 100 mm is adopted for the analysis of all box girder bridge
model.

Fig. 5. Convergence study

3.2 Parametric Study
Those geometrical parameters are chosen for the study that could be directly affect the bridge design. Those parameters are
skew angle, span length, girder spacing, span-depth ratio. The objective of the parametric study is to investigate the effect of
all parameters affect BM and SF in both girder of RCC box girder bridge. Bridges with four span length of 20,25,30,35m are
chosen. Girder spacing of the models are 6, 6.5, 7 m. Span-depth ratio are chosen from 11-19. The angle of skew are 0˚-60˚ by
increments of 10˚.

3.2 Results and Discussion

The results of these parameters are summarized below. The finite element analysis results were obtained and reported in terms
of maximum BM and SF in interior and exterior girder of the box girder bridge due to combined DL and LL (two class-A
wheel load)

a) Effect of skew angle: The skew angle is the most critical parameter that affect the BM and SF and it is the main focus of
the study. This study show that in interior and exterior girders, moment is always less and shear force is always greater
than those of straight bridge. From Fig. 6 the moment due to combined DL and LL of external girder and internal girder
reduces by 10% and 8% respectively for a skew angle 60˚ when compared with straight bridges. However the effect of
skew angle on moment is insignificant up to 30˚.

a) For exterior girder

b) For interior girder

Fig. 6 Bending moment due to combined DL and LL with varying skew angle
Fig. 7 shows the effect of skew angle on SF for both girders with different span length. It can be observed that for both girders,
the effect of skew angle on SF increases when span length increases for both girders. For skew angle 60˚ SF increased 60%
and 55% as compared with straight girder respectively. The pattern is same for all span length.

a) For exterior girder

b) For interior girder

Fig. 7 Shear force due to combined DL and LL with varying skew angle

It can be concluded that the larger skew angle reduces BM and increase SF. This is due to fact that some of the wheels of class-
A wheel on skew bridges are closer to support than on right bridges.

b) Effect of span length: The result presented in Fig. 8 shows the influence of span length upon moment in both girders with
varying skew angle. The BM for internal and external girders increases with increasing span length. BM is nearly equal
for 0˚ and 20˚ skew angle for both girders. The result also show that effect span length on moment is same for different
skew angle in both girders. Moment is higher in interior girder than external girder.
 a) For exterior girder

b) For interior girder

Fig. 8 Bending moment due to combined DL and LL with varying span length

Fig. 9 shows the effect of span length on SF for interior and exterior girder with varying skew angle. For both girder, with
increasing of Shear force increases. The effect of span length in exterior girder (89%) is higher than the interior girder
(86%) when span length increases from 20 m to 35 m. For all skew angle, the effect on SF with varying span is same.
Difference in SF is small for skew angle between 0˚ to 20˚.
 a) For exterior girder

b) For interior girder

Fig. 9 Shear force due to combined DL and LL with varying span length

c) Effect of girder spacing: The relations between BM and girder spacing for interior and exterior girder with different skew
angle are presented in Fig.10 for combined DL and LL. It can be observed that the BM in both girders increases with
increase in the girder spacing. The effect is almost same for different skew angle. The effect on BM is insignificant with
the increase of skew angle. The variation in BM up to 20˚ is very low.

a) For exterior girder

 b) For interior girder
Fig. 10 Bending moment due to combined DL and LL with varying girder spacing

Fig. 11 shows the relationship between SF and girder spacing for interior and exterior girder with different skew angle for
combined DL and LL. It can be observed that variation in SF is very low in both girders with increase in girder spacing. The
effect in SF is same for different skew angle. SF in interior and exterior girder is not sensitive to girder spacing.

a) For exterior girder

 b) For interior girder
Fig. 11 Shear force due to combined DL and LL with varying girder spacing
d) Effect of span-depth ratio: Fig.12 shows the relationship between span-depth ratio and BM with different skew angle.
BM decreases with increasing of span-depth ratio in interior and exterior girder. Upto 20˚, the BM is almost same. The
effect of skew angle on BM is nearly equivalent. For span-depth ratio 19, the BM decreases by 10% in exterior girder and
decreases by 13% in interior girder when compared with span-depth ratio 11.

a) For exterior girder

b) For interior girder

Fig. 12 Bending moment due to combined DL and LL with varying span-depth ratio
Fig.13 shows the relationship between SF and span-depth ratio with different skew angle. For interior and exterior girder, the
SF increases with increasing of span-depth ratio at different skew angle. This case is not same for straight bridge. In straight
bridge, SF is decreases by 7% with increasing of span-depth ratio for both girders. In interior girder, SF is increases by 11%
and 9% in exterior girder for span-depth ratio 19.

a) For exterior girder

b) For interior girder

Fig. 13 Shear force due to combined DL and LL with varying span-depth ratio
4 Conclusions
A parametric study is conducted on simply supported RCC box girder bridges analysed using finite element model. The effect
of skew angle, span length, girder spacing, span-depth ratio on the BM and SF for interior and exterior girder for box girder
bridge subjected to IRC class-A load as well as dead load. Based on this study the following conclusions can be made:
 Increase in the skew angle reduces the BM and increases the SF in interior and exterior girder. The effect of skew
angle for interior girder is same to exterior girder but with higher value for BM and SF. This influence has no
significant for skew angle less than 30˚.
 An increase in the bridge span increases the SF and BM for both girder.
 An increase in the girder spacing increases the BM for both girder. This effect is insignificant with the skew angle. SF
is not sensitive to girder spacing.
 Increase in the span depth ratio reduces the BM for both girder. The effect is same for all skew angle on BM with
span-depth ratio but SF is increase with increasing span-depth ratio for different skew angle except straight bridge.

Acknowledgement
The authors acknowledge the Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad for providing financial support under
TEQIP- III.
References
[1] Mehrain M., “Finite element analysis of skew composite girder bridges.” Structures and Materials Research,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, 1967, report no. 67-28.
[2] Gustafson W. C. and Wright R. N. “Analysis of skewed composite girder bridges.” Struct. Div., Proc. ASCE, 94(St4),
1968, pp. 919-941.
[3] Bakht B., “Analysis of some skew bridges as eight bridges.” J. Struct. Eng., 114(10), 1988, pp. 2307-2322.
[4] Khaleel M. A. and Itani R. Y., “Live-load moments for continuous skew bridges.” J. Struct. Eng., 116(9), 1990, pp.
2361-2373.
[5] Helba A. and Kennedy J. B., “Collapse loads of continuous skew composite bridges.” J. Struct. Eng., 120(5), 1994a,
pp. 1395-1414.
[6] Helba A. and Kennedy J. B., “Parametric study on the collapse loads of skew composite bridges.” J. Struct. Eng.,
120(5), 1994b, pp. 1415-1433.
[7] Barr J. P., Eberhard M. O., and Stanton J. F., “Live-load distribution factors in prestressed concrete girder bridges.” J.
Bridge Eng., 6(5), 2001, pp. 298-306.
[8] Khaloo A. R. and Mirazbozorg H., “Load distribution factors in simply supported skew bridges.” J. Bridge Eng., 8(4),
2003, pp. 241-244.
[9] Huang H., Shenton H. W. and Chajes M. J., “Load distribution for a highly skewed bridge:testing and analysis.” J.
Bridge Eng., 9(6), 2004, pp. 558-562.
[10] Menassa, Mabsout M., Tarhini K. and Frederick G., “Influence of skew angle on reinforced concrete slab bridges.” J.
Bridge Eng., 12(2), 2007, pp. 205-214.
[11] Nouri G. and Ahmad Z., “Influence of skew angle on continuous composite girder bridge.” J. Bridge Eng., 17(4), 2012,
pp. 617-623.
[12] Ashebo D. B., Chan T.H.T. and Yu L., “Evaluation of dynamic loads on a skew box girder continuous bridge Part I:
Field test and modal analysis.” Engineering Structures, 29(4), 2007, pp. 1052-1063.
[13] Ashebo D. B., Chan T.H.T. and Yu L., “Evaluation of dynamic loads on a skew box girder continuous bridge Part II:
Parametric study and dynamic load factor.” Engineering Structures, 29(4), 2007, pp. 1064-1073.
[14] Gupta T. and Kumar M., “Structural response of concrete skew box-girder bridges a state-of-the-art review.”
International journal of bridge engineering, 5(1), 2017, pp. 37-59.
[15] Gupta T. and Kumar M., “Flexural response of skew-curved concrete box-girder bridges.” Engineering Structures, 163,
2018, pp. 358-372.
[16] AASHTO-LRFD Bridge design specifications, sixth edition. American association of state highway and transportation
officials, Washington, DC; 2012.
[17] Indian Road Congress (IRC), “IRC 21: Standard specification and code of practice for road bridges, section III-cement
concrete (planed and reinforced).” Indian Road Congress, New Delhi, India, 2000.
[18] Indian Road Congress (IRC), “IRC 6: Standard specifications and code of practice for road bridges, section II, loads &
stresses,” Indian Road Congress, New Delhi, India, 2016.
[19] Computers and Structures Inc. (CSI), SAP2000 analysis reference manual, ver 14.0.0, Computers and Structures, Inc.,
Berkeley, CA, 2016.