Gravity-triggered rotational connecting method for automated segmental bridge construction

doi:10.1007/s11709-024-1101-3

Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.

2024, Vol. 18

Issue (10) : 1595-1609 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-024-1101-3

Gravity-triggered rotational connecting method for automated segmental bridge construction

Yaoyu YANG, Shihchung KANG, Chiaming CHANG(

)

Department of Civil Engineering, Taiwan University, Taipei 10617, China

Download: PDF(2665 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

Automated construction has become urgently needed because the construction industry faces labor safety and cost challenges. However, these developments require investments in new equipment to facilitate automation in construction, resulting in even higher capital costs. Therefore, the research proposes a gravity-triggered rotational connecting (GTRC) method for automating segmental bridge construction. In this automated construction method, a segment-to-segment connector is developed to exploit an eccentric moment introduced by gravity and achieve segmental connections. For implementation, a specific rigging method is presented for a conventional telescopic crane to maintain a particular orientation. Meanwhile, crane path planning is also proposed to guide one segment toward the other segment. A combined computational and experimental verification program is established and employs a simply supported bridge as an example for the proposed method. With the designed connector and rigging assembly, the proposed method is computationally and experimentally verified to automate segmental bridge construction.

Keywords automated construction crane path planning segment-to-segment connector rigging design rotational connection

Corresponding Author(s): Chiaming CHANG

Just Accepted Date: 17 July 2024 Online First Date: 23 September 2024 Issue Date: 29 October 2024

Cite this article:

Yaoyu YANG,Shihchung KANG,Chiaming CHANG. Gravity-triggered rotational connecting method for automated segmental bridge construction[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2024, 18(10): 1595-1609.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-024-1101-3
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2024/V18/I10/1595

Fig.1 Framework of the proposed GTRC method.

Fig.2 Illustration of a segment connection: (a) the tenon–mortise connector; (b) the segment; (c) the post-pin-connection; (d) the post-tensioning confinement.

Fig.3 Geometry design of gravity-triggered rotational connector.

Fig.4 Rigging design: (a) side view of the segment; (b) back view of the segment.

Fig.5 Transportation phase of a movable segment.

Fig.6 Rotational connection phase of a movable segment.

Fig.7 Crane model in the x–y coordinates.

Design and construction process	Variables
Segment geometry	$L c$ , $H c$
Connector geometry design	$d 1$ , $r 1$ , $r 2$ , $r 4$ , $θ 2$ , $θ 3$ , $θ 4$ , $W c$ , $t c$
Rigging assessment	$θ t 0$ , $Δ z$
Crane path planning	$l$ , $l c d$ , $l b c$ , $l a b$ , $l s a$ , $θ h$ , $N p$ , $L t$ , $d, h$

Tab.1 User-defined variables in the GTRC method

Fig.8 GTRC method flowchart: (a) the segment identification; (b) connector geometry design; (c) rigging assessment, and the rest for the crane path planning.

Parameter	Value	Unit
H_s	2.294	m
L_s	3.668	m
W_s	13.331	m
A_sc	2.200	m²
w_dl	5.328 × 10⁴	N/m
Computational $c G$	$[? 1.834 ? 0.7194] T$	$[m m] T$
Experimental $c G$	$[? 0.183 ? 0.06] T$	$[m m] T$
L_c	0.6911	m
H_c	0.552	m

Tab.2 Bridge segment information

Fig.9 Combined computational and experimental verification program: (a) bridge segment; (b) simulation environment by Unity; and (c) scaled experiment.

Index	Parameter	Value	Unit
User-defined variable	$d 1$	0.04	m
	$r 1$	0.08	m
	$r 2$	0.17	m
	$θ 2$	64.02	°
	$θ 3$	88.00	°
	$θ 4$	56.29	°
	$r 4$	0.39	m
	$W c$	0.55	m
	$t c$	0.10	m
Geometric parameter	$c 1$	$[0.3456 ? 0.04] T$	$[m m] T$
	$θ 1$	299.168	°
	$c 2$	$[0.2774 ? 0.246] T$	$[m m] T$
	$r 3$	0.255	m

Tab.3 Connector geometric variables

Fig.10 Connector design and design failures with blue highlights: (a) the rotatable joint arc; (b) the rotatable joint arc with

r 1 = d 1

; (c) the upper connecting arc; (d) the upper connecting arc with

θ 2

= 211.70°; (e) the lower connecting arc; (f) the lower connecting arc with

θ 3 =

107.31°; (g) the bottom connecting arc and line segment; (h) the bottom connecting arc and line segment with

r 3

= 0.255 m;

r 4

= 0.2 m, and

θ 4

= 56.29°; (i) the bottom connecting arc and line segment with

θ 4

?

15°,

r 3

= 0.255 m, and

r 4

= 0.39 m; (j) the final connector design; (k) the designed tenon and mortise connector.

Connector design point	Position ( $[m m] T$ )
P₁	$p 1 = [0.2774 0]$
P₂	$p 2 = [0.4137 0]$
P₃	$p 3 = [0.2774 ? 0.08]$
P₄	$p 4 = [0.1282 ? 0.1733]$
P₅	$p 5 = [0.4712 ? 0.2619]$
P₆	$p 6 = [0.5377 ? 0.3794]$
P₇	$p 7 = [0.1699 ? 0.3882]$
P₈	$p 8 = [0.1699 ? 0.552]$

Tab.4 Connector design points

Fig.11 FEA setup and results: (a) the loading condition and the results; (b) the shear strength; (c) the moment strength of the mortise connector; (d) the moment strength of the tenon connector.

Fig.12 Segment poses with different tilt angles: (a)

θ t

= ?107.31°; (b)

θ t

= ?78.0° ; (c)

θ t

= ?91.5°; (d)

θ t

= ?90.0° .

Fig.13 Cable anchors linking the movable segment and the cable: (a) the simulation; (b) the scaled experiment.

Index	Parameter	Value	Unit
User-defined variable	$l$	5.09	m
	$l s a$	1.93	m
	$l a b$	7.20	m
	$l b c$	0.30	m
	$l c d$	0.20	m
Critical via point	$Q s$	[?6.85 7.63]^T	$[m m] T$
	$Q a$	[?6.85 9.55]^T	$[m m] T$
	$Q b$	[0.35 9.55]^T	$[m m] T$
	$Q c$	[0.35 9.25]^T	$[m m] T$
	$Q d$	[0.35 9.05]^T	$[m m] T$
	$Q f$	[?3.67 3.60]^T	$[m m] T$
Crane parameter	d	4.56	m
	h	1.86	m
	$L t$	1.13	m
	$θ h$	90	°

Tab.5 Crane path planning in the simulation

Fig.14 Crane operation sequence.

Fig.15 Comparison of the tilt angle for the (a) x-coordinates in simulation; (b) y-coordinates in simulation.

Index	Parameter	Value	Unit
User-defined variable	$l$	634.76	mm
	$l s a$	513.00	mm
	$l a b$	719.00	mm
	$l b c$	284.71	mm
	$l c d$	64.76	mm
Critical via point	$Q s$	[?741 802]^T	$[m m m m] T$
	$Q a$	[?741 1315]^T	$[m m m m] T$
	$Q b$	[?22 1315]^T	$[m m m m] T$
	$Q c$	[?22 1030]^T	$[m m m m] T$
	$Q d$	[?22 966]^T	$[m m m m] T$
	$Q f$	[?366 510]^T	$[m m m m] T$

Tab.6 Crane path planning in the scaled experiment

Fig.16 Comparison of the tilt angle with respect to the (a) x-coordinates in the scaled experiment; (b) y-coordinates in the scaled experiment.

1	B V Viscomi, W D Michalerya, L W Lu. Automated construction in the ATLSS integrated building systems. Automation in Construction, 1994, 3(1): 35–43 https://doi.org/10.1016/0926-5805(94)90030-2
2	Y Yamazaki, J Maeda. The SMART system: An integrated application of automation and information technology in production process. Computers in Industry, 1998, 35(1): 87–99 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-3615(97)00086-9
3	C W Kim, T Kim, U K Lee, H Cho, K I Kang. Advanced steel beam assembly approach for improving safety of structural steel workers. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2016, 142(4): 05015019 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001090
4	C J Liang, S C Kang, M H Lee. RAS: a robotic assembly system for steel structure erection and assembly. International Journal of Intelligent Robotics and Applications, 2017, 1(4): 459–476 https://doi.org/10.1007/s41315-017-0030-x
5	M Scholl. kranXpert Software. Available at the website of kranXpert, 2022
6	K L Lin, C T Haas. Multiple heavy lifts optimization. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 1996, 122(4): 354–362 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1996)122:4(354
7	K Varghese, P Dharwadkar, J Wolfhope, J T O’Connor. A heavy lift planning system for crane lifts. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 1997, 12(1): 31–42 https://doi.org/10.1111/0885-9507.00044
8	S M A MinayHashemi, S H Han, J Olearczyk, A Bouferguene, M Al-Hussein, J Kosa. Automated rigging design for heavy industrial lifts. Automation in Construction, 2020, 112: 103083 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103083
9	M Rosignoli. Bridge Construction Equipment. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2016
10	J André, R Beale, A Baptista. Bridge construction equipment: an overview of the existing design guidance. Structural Engineering International, 2012, 22(3): 365–379 https://doi.org/10.2749/101686612X13363869853419
11	L Ramli, Z Mohamed, A M Abdullahi, H I Jaafar, I M Lazim. Control strategies for crane systems: A comprehensive review. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2017, 95: 1–23 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2017.03.015
12	S Sadeghi, N Soltanmohammadlou, P Rahnamayiezekavat. A systematic review of scholarly works addressing crane safety requirements. Safety Science, 2021, 133: 105002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.105002
13	J Tian, S Luo, X Wang, J Hu, J Yin. Crane lifting optimization and construction monitoring in steel bridge construction project based on BIM and UAV. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2021, 5512229 https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5512229
14	S Hu, Y Fang, Y Bai. Automation and optimization in crane lift planning: A critical review. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 2021, 49: 101346 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2021.101346
15	J Vičan, M Farbák. Analysis of high-strength steel pin connection. Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2020, 16(2): 276–281 https://doi.org/10.2478/cee-2020-0027
16	K H Tan, R A Tjandra. Strengthening of precast concrete girder bridges by post-tensioning for continuity. PCI Journal, 2003, 48(3): 56–71 https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij.05012003.56.71
17	F Y Yeh, K C Chang, Y C Sung, H H Hung, C C Chou. A novel composite bridge for emergency disaster relief: Concept and verification. Composite Structures, 2015, 127: 199–210 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.03.012
18	A K Chopra. Dynamics of Structures. New York: Pearson Education India, 2007

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed