Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

ISSN 2095-2430

ISSN 2095-2449(Online)

CN 10-1023/X

Postal Subscription Code 80-968

2018 Impact Factor: 1.272

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.    2021, Vol. 15 Issue (2) : 364-377    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-021-0702-3
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Precast steel–UHPC lightweight composite bridge for accelerated bridge construction
Shuwen DENG1,2, Xudong SHAO2(), Xudong ZHAO2, Yang WANG2, Yan WANG2
1. College of Water Resources and Civil Engineering, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha 410128, China
2. Key Laboratory for Wind and Bridge Engineering of Hunan Province, Hunan University, Changsha 410082, China
 Download: PDF(5804 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

In this study, a fully precast steel–ultrahigh performance concrete (UHPC) lightweight composite bridge (LWCB) was proposed based on Mapu Bridge, aiming at accelerating construction in bridge engineering. Cast-in-place joints are generally the controlling factor of segmental structures. Therefore, an innovative girder-to-girder joint that is suitable for LWCB was developed. A specimen consisting of two prefabricated steel–UHPC composite girder parts and one post-cast joint part was fabricated to determine if the joint can effectively transfer load between girders. The flexural behavior of the specimen under a negative bending moment was explored. Finite element analyses of Mapu Bridge showed that the nominal stress of critical sections could meet the required stress, indicating that the design is reasonable. The fatigue performance of the UHPC deck was assessed based on past research, and results revealed that the fatigue performance could meet the design requirements. Based on the test results, a crack width prediction method for the joint interface, a simplified calculation method for the design moment, and a deflection calculation method for the steel–UHPC composite girder in consideration of the UHPC tensile stiffness effect were presented. Good agreements were achieved between the predicted values and test results.
Keywords accelerated bridge construction      ultrahigh-performance concrete      steel–UHPC composite bridge      UHPC girder-to-girder joint     
Corresponding Author(s): Xudong SHAO   
Just Accepted Date: 18 March 2021   Online First Date: 30 April 2021    Issue Date: 27 May 2021
 Cite this article:   
Shuwen DENG,Xudong SHAO,Xudong ZHAO, et al. Precast steel–UHPC lightweight composite bridge for accelerated bridge construction[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2021, 15(2): 364-377.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-021-0702-3
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2021/V15/I2/364
Fig.1  Schematic of Mapu Bridge: (a) 3D drawing; (b) cross-section (unit: cm).
Fig.2  Internal force distribution of Mapu Bridge.
Fig.3  Schematic of the T-shaped joint: (a) appearance of the T-shaped joint; (b) internal part of the T-shaped joint.
items position Stage I Stage II
fundamental combination fundamental combination frequent combination
UHPC panel pier top – 14.76 9.00
mid-span −4.22 –23.00 –13.89
joint interface – 8.80 5.08
I-shaped steel girder mid-span lower flange 43.00 230.10 138.11
mid-span upper flange –15.10 –170.27 –102.28
Tab.1  Results for the two-stage combined stresses of the bridge (MPa)
Fig.4  Details of the specimen (unit: mm): (a) 3D view; (b) cross-section; (c) reinforcement layout in half-span.
Fig.5  Surface treatment of the prefabricated parts.
item curing condition compressive strength flexural strength Young’s modulus
prefabricated part steam curing 162.38 28.74 49030
post-cast joint part natural curing 135.01 32.19 45820
Tab.2  Mechanical properties of UHPC (MPa)
Fig.6  Loading and measuring devices used in the flexural test.
Fig.7  Load–deflection curve in the mid-span.
Fig.8  Crack distribution on the specimen surface.
Fig.9  Main crack development.
Fig.10  Cracking characteristics of different substrates: (a) interface crack; (b) matrix crack; (c) plain UHPC crack.
Fig.11  Stain development in the lower flange of the I-shaped steel girder.
Fig.12  Schematic of calculation sections (unit: mm).
Sections Pcr (kN) σcr (MPa)
Section 2 (interface) 196.6 ?7.39
Section 4 (interface) 143.5 ?5.40
Section 1 (matrix) 424.5 15.96
Section 5 (matrix) 336.5 12.66
Section 3 (mid-span, pier top) 1033.9? 19.02
Tab.3  Loading and nominal stresses of critical sections
locations fatigue stress amplitude (MPa) σ0.05 (MPa) σRc/σ0.05
joint center 3.26 19.02 0.17
joint interface 1.96 6.4 (mean) 0.58
Tab.4  Fatigue stress amplitude and static test results
items Ref. [29] joint center Ref. [29] joint interface
fatigue stress amplitude 0.9σ0.05 0.17σ0.05 σ0.05 0.58σ0.05
fatigue load cycle (×104) 100 14478 100 3482
Tab.5  Results of the fatigue performance evaluation
Fig.13  Prediction value and test results for joint interface crack width.
Fig.14  Critical point internal force calculation diagram: (a) original section; (b) equivalent section; (c) strain distribution; (d) stress distribution in Stages I and II; (e) stress distribution in Stage III.
Fig.15  Diagram of the calculation of critical point internal force: (a) cracked section; (b) equivalent section; (c) strain distribution; (d) stress distribution in Stage IV; (e) stress distribution in Stage V.
Fig.16  Comparison of experimental and calculation results.
1 B A Graybeal. Material Property Characterization of Ultra-High Performance Concrete. No. FHWA-HRT-06-103. McLean: United States Federal Highway Administration, 2006
2 R Krelaus, G Wisner, S Freisinger-Schadow, M Schmidt, S Böhm, K Dilger. Resistance of adhesive bonding of ultra-high performance concrete to hygrothermal, corrosive, and freeze-thaw cycling environments. Journal of ASTM International, 2009, 6(9): 227–253
3 S C Paul, A J Babafemi. A review of the mechanical and durability properties of strain hardening cement-based composite (SHCC). Journal of Sustainable Cement-Based Materials, 2018, 7(1): 57–78
https://doi.org/10.1080/21650373.2017.1394236
4 W Meng, K H Khayat. Effect of hybrid fibers on fresh properties, mechanical properties, and autogenous shrinkage of cost-effective UHPC. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 2018, 30(4): 04018030
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002212
5 S Ghasemi, A Mirmiran, Y Xiao, K Mackie. Novel UHPC-CFRP waffle deck panel system for accelerated bridge construction. Journal of Composites for Construction, 2016, 20(1): 04015042
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000607
6 M Tazarv, M S Saiidi. UHPC-filled duct connections for accelerated bridge construction of RC columns in high seismic zones. Engineering Structures, 2015, 99: 413–422
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.05.018
7 X Shao, D Yi, Z Huang, H Zhao, B Chen, M Liu. Basic performance of the composite deck system composed of orthotropic steel deck and ultrathin RPC layer. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2013, 18(5): 417–428
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000348
8 S Ghasemi, P Zohrevand, A Mirmiran, Y Xiao, K Mackie. A super lightweight UHPC–HSS deck panel for movable bridges. Engineering Structures, 2016, 113: 186–193
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.01.046
9 S Deng, X Shao, B Yan, Y Guan. Lightweight steel-UHPC composite bridge with overall prefabrication and fast erection in city. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 2017, 30(3): 159–166 (in Chinese)
10 B A Graybeal. Structural Behavior of a 2nd Generation Ultra-High Performance Concrete Pi-Girder. No. FHWA-HRT-09-069. Federal Highway Administration, 2009
11 B A Graybeal. Behavior of Field-Cast Ultra-High Performance Concrete Bridge Deck Connections under Cyclic and Static Structural Loading. No. FHWA-HRT-11-023. Federal Highway Administration, 2010
12 S Aaleti, B Petersen, S Sritharan. Design Guide for Precast UHPC Waffle Deck Panel System, including Connections. No. FHWA-HIF-13-032. Federal Highway Administration, 2013
13 V Perry, G Weiss. Innovative Field Cast UHPC Joints for Precast Bridge Decks. In: The 3rd fib International Congress. New York: Design, Prototyping, Testing and Construction, 2011, 421–436
14 B Graybeal. Ultra-high-performance concrete connections for precast concrete bridge decks. PCI Journal, 2014, 59(4): 48–62
https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.09012014.48.62
15 Y P Guan. Design and Preliminary Experiments of UHPC-Shaped Girder Bridge. Changsha: Hunan University, 2016 (in Chinese)
16 MTPRC. General Specifations for Design of Highway Bridges and Culverts, JTG D60-2015. Beijing: China Communications Press Co., Ltd, 2015
17 MTPRC. Specifications for Design of Highway Steel Bridge, JTG D64-2015. Beijing: China Communications Press Co., Ltd, 2015
18 MTPRC. Specifications for Design of Highway Reinforced Concrete and Prestressed Concrete Bridges and Culverts, JTG 3362-2018. Beijing: China Communications Press Co., Ltd, 2018
19 E Samaniego, C Anitescu, S Goswami, V M Nguyen-Thanh, H Guo, K Hamdia, X Zhuang, T Rabczuk. An energy approach to the solution of partial differential equations in computational mechanics via machine learning: Concepts, implementation and applications. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2020, 362: 112790
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2019.112790
20 C Anitescu, E Atroshchenko, N Alajlan, T Rabczuk. Artificial neural network methods for the solution of second order boundary value problems. Computers, Materials & Continua, 2019, 59(1): 345–359
https://doi.org/10.32604/cmc.2019.06641
21 Z Zhang, X, Shao W Li, P Zhu, H. Chen Axial tensile behaviour test of ultra high performance concrete. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 2015, 28(8): 50–58 (in Chinese)
22 AFGC-SETRA. Ultra High Performance Fibrereinforced Concretes. Recommendations. Paris: AFGC&SETRA Working Group, 2013, 1–175
23 P Richard, M Cheyrezy. Composition of reactive powder concretes. Cement and Concrete Research, 1995, 25(7): 1501–1511
https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-8846(95)00144-2
24 X Shao, R Pan, H Zhan, W Fan, Z Yang, W Lei. Experimental verification of the feasibility of a novel prestressed reactive powder concrete box-girder bridge structure. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2017, 22(6): 04017015
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001033
25 MOHURD. Reactive Powder Concrete, GB/T 31387-2015. Beijing: Standardization Administration, 2015
26 W H Pan, J S Fan, J G Nie, J H Hu, J F Cui. Experimental study on tensile behavior of wet joints in a prefabricated composite deck system composed of orthotropic steel deck and ultrathin reactive-powder concrete layer. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2016, 21(10): 04016064
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000935
27 X D Shao, J J Wu, R Liu, Z Li. Basic performance of waffle deck panel of lightweight Steel-UHPC composite bridge. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 2017, 30(3): 218–225 (in Chinese)
28 European Committee for Standardization (CEN). European Prestandard ENV 1991-4. Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. Brussels: CEN, 1999
29 S Aaleti, E Honarvar, S Sritharan, J M Rouse, T J Wipf. Structural Characterization of UHPC Waffle Bridge Deck and Connections. Trans Project Reports. 73. Iowa State University, 2014
30 J Luo, X Shao, W Fan, J Cao, S Deng. Flexural cracking behavior and crack width predictions of composite (steel+ UHPC) lightweight deck system. Engineering Structures, 2019, 194: 120–137
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.05.018
31 MOHURD. Code for Design of Concrete Structures, GB50010-2010. Beijing: Ministry of Construction People’s Republic of China, 2010
32 International Federation for Structural Concrete. Fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010. Switzerland: Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne-EPFL, 2010
33 American Concrete Institute (ACI). Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318M-89) and Commentary-ACI 318RM-89. ACI, 1990
[1] Elmira SHOUSHTARI, M. Saiid SAIIDI, Ahmad ITANI, Mohamed A. MOUSTAFA. Pretest analysis of shake table response of a two-span steel girder bridge incorporating accelerated bridge construction connections[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(1): 169-184.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed