Skip to main content
Log in

Longitudinal load distribution of a weakly connected prefabricated bridge abutment

  • Original
  • Published:
Archive of Applied Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A new type of prefabricated abutment with a weak connection is proposed. The longitudinal load (like banking force, earth pressure) distribution of this new type of prefabricated abutment was analyzed based on the hinge-joined slab method. A simplified method for calculating the stiffness parameters of the panels was introduced. The influence lines of the longitudinal load on the prefabricated abutment of an actual bridge were calculated by using the proposed theoretical method and finite element method. The comparison between theoretical calculation and simulation results shows that the theoretical calculation method proposed in this paper is correct. In order to investigate the influence of the different thicknesses of the cap beam and dimensions of prefabricated panels on the calculation error of the theoretical calculation method. The influence lines of the prefabricated abutments with different parameters were calculated theoretically and simulated. All calculation errors of the central values of influence lines were less than 20% when the thickness of the cap beam changes from 0.8 to 2.4 m, the errors were all less than 10% when the thickness of the cap beam was 1.2–1.575 m. This calculation further verified that the theoretical calculation method proposed in this paper is suitable for longitudinal load distribution of a weakly connected Prefabricated bridge abutment. It provides a reference for the design and theoretical calculation of prefabricated abutment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. FHWA (Federal Highway Administration): Accelerated bridge construction. Accessed 15 October 2019. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/abc/.

  2. Kurama, Y.C., Sritharan, S., Fleischman, R.B.: Seismic-resistant precast concrete structures: state of the art. American Society of Civil Engineers (2018)

  3. Wang, J.Q., Wang, Z., Gao, Y.F.: Review on aseismic behaviour of precast piers: new material, a new concept, and new application. J. Eng. Mech. 36(3), 1–23 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Khan, M.A.: Accelerated Bridge Construction: Best Practices and Techniques. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Alastair, M.A.: Accelerated Bridge Construction (ABC), A better approach to bridge construction. Int. J. Innov. Educ. Res. 4(8), 41–70 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Xiang, Y.Q., Zhu, S., Zhao, Y.: Research and development on accelerated bridge construction technology. China J. Highway Transp. 31(12), 1–27 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Khan, M.A.: Accelerated bridge construction. Accelerated Bridge Construction (2015)

  8. Khaleghi, B., Schultz, E., Seguirant, S., et al.: Accelerated bridge construction in Washington State: from research to practice. PCI J. 57(4), 34 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hieber, D.G., Wacker, J.M., Eberhard, M.O.: State-of-the-art report on precast concrete systems for rapid construction of bridges. Washington State Transportation Center (2005)

  10. Marsh, M.L.: Application of accelerated bridge construction connections in moderate-to-high seismic regions. Transportation Research Board (2011)

  11. Haber, Z.B., Mackie, K.R., Al-Jelawy, H.M.: Testing and analysis of precast columns with grouted sleeve connections and shifted plastic hinging. J Bridge Eng. 22(10), 04017078 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Haber, Z.B., Saiidi, M.S., Sanders, D.H.: Behavior and simplified modeling of mechanical reinforcing bar splices. ACI Struct. J. 112(2), 179 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Culmo, M.P.: Connection details for preprecast bridge elements and systems. United States. Federal Highway Administration. Office of Bridge Technology (2009)

  14. Li, T., Qu, H., Wang, Z.: Seismic performance of precast concrete bridge columns with quasi-static cyclic shear test for high seismic zones. Eng. Struct. 166, 441–453 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ameli, M.J., Pantelides, C.P.: Seismic analysis of precast concrete bridge columns connected with grouted splice sleeve connectors. J. Struct. Eng. 143(2), 04016176 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ou, Y.C., Wang, P.H., Tsai, M.S.: Large-scale experimental study of precast segmental unbonded post-tensioned concrete bridge columns for seismic regions. J. Struct. Eng. 136(3), 255–264 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Stephens, M.T., Berg, L.M., Lehman, D.: Seismic CFST column-to-precast cap beam connections for accelerated bridge construction. J. Struct. Eng. 142(9), 04016049 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kim, D.H., Kim, M.K., Zi, G.: Experimental test and seismic performance of partial precast concrete segmental bridge column with cast-in-place base. Eng. Struct. 100, 178–188 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ichikawa, S., Matsuzaki, H., Moustafa, A.: Seismic-resistant bridge columns with ultrahigh- performance concrete segments. J. Bridge Eng. 21(9), 04016049 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yang, C., Okumus, P.: Ultrahigh- performance concrete for post-tensioned precast bridge piers for seismic resilience. J. Struct. Eng. 143(12), 04017161 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Zhu, Z., Ahmad, I., Mirmiran, A.: Seismic performance of concrete-filled FRP tube columns for bridge substructure. J. Bridge Eng. 11(3), 359–370 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Moustafa, A., ElGawady, M.A.: Shaking table testing of segmental hollow-core FRP-concrete-steel bridge columns. J. Bridge Eng. 23(5), 04018020 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Scanlon, A., Aswad, A., Stellar, J.: Precast post-tensioned abutment system and precast superstructure for rapid on-site construction. Transp. Res. Rec. 1814(1), 65–71 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Dowling, N.E.: Mechanical Behaviour of Materials: Engineering Methods for Deformation, Fracture, and Fatigue. Pearson, London (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Xanthakos, P.P.: Theory and Design of Bridges. Wiley, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was financially supported by the National Key R&D Program of China under Awards 2017YFC0806000, "5511" Innovation Driven Project of Jiangxi Province (20165ABC28001).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yasir Ibrahim Shah.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

We declare that we do not have any commercial or associative interest that represents a conflict of interest connected with the work submitted.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1

Here, the values of the two kinds of influence lines with 4 panels whose size is b = 3 m, B = 1.8 m, H = 3.115 m are listed. The thickness of cap beam h1 changes from 0.8 m to 2.4 m. The relative error (%) of the central values between the results of FEM and TM and the stiffness parameter are also listed in Tables 4,

Table 4 Values of the braking force influence lines of 1# panel

5,

Table 5 Values of the braking force influence lines of 2# panel

6

Table 6 Values of the earth pressure influence lines of 1# panel

and 7

Table 7 Values of the earth pressure influence lines of 2# panel

.

Appendix 2

Here, different with Appendix A, the number of precast panels changes to 5. The panels size is unchanged (b = 3 m, B = 1.8 m, H = 3.115 m). The thickness of cap beam h1 still changes from 0.8 m to 2.4 m. The relative error (%) of the central values between the results of FEM and TM and the stiffness parameter are also listed in Tables 8,

Table 8 Values of the braking force influence lines of 1# panel

9,

Table 9 Values of the braking force influence lines of 2# panel

10, 11, 12 and 13.

Table 10 Values of the braking force influence lines of 3# panel
Table 11 Values of the earth pressure influence lines of 1# panel
Table 12 Values of the earth pressure influence lines of 2# panel
Table 13 Values of the earth pressure influence lines of 3# panel

Appendix 3

Here, different from Appendix A, the height of panels changes from 3.115 m to 2.5 m. The other sizes of panels size were unchanged (b = 3 m, B = 1.8 m). The thickness of cap beam h1 still changes from 0.8 m to 2.4 m. The relative error (%) of the central values between FEM and TM and the stiffness parameter are also listed in Tables 14, 15, 16 and 17.

Table 14 Values of the braking force influence lines of the 1# panel
Table 15 Values of the braking force influence lines of 2# panel
Table 16 Values of the earth pressure influence lines of the 1# panel
Table 17 Values of the earth pressure influence lines of 2# panel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xia, L., Hu, Z. & Shah, Y.I. Longitudinal load distribution of a weakly connected prefabricated bridge abutment. Arch Appl Mech 91, 4121–4140 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00419-021-01995-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00419-021-01995-1

Keywords

Navigation