Advertisement

International Journal of Civil Engineering

, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 319–332 | Cite as

Design Assessment of Short-Span Steel Bridges

  • Edgar Tapia-HernándezEmail author
  • Tiziano Perea
  • Marco A. Islas-Mendoza
Research Paper

Abstract

The assessment of four short-span steel bridges from 24 to 42 m under local overloaded trucks and ground motion records are presented and discussed. Bridges were virtually located in Mexico, and so the vehicular live loads, earthquake loads due to local seismicity, and other local loads were adapted in the design. A realistic condition of the local design truck for Mexico was selected from survey traffic flows reported for local highways. Nonlinear dynamic analyses were carried out using seven historical records associated with the largest vertical intensities from subduction earthquakes in Mexico. The results are intended to evaluate the local practice, which frequently adopts the current AASHTO LRFD Specifications in the absence of an official local design code for bridge structures. This research pretends to provide design recommendations for short-span steel bridges in Mexico, in particular for those related to the influence of local seismicity and overloaded vehicular loading in local highways. Results achieved from the strength and serviceability limit states indicate that the design of the steel plate girders is controlled by the gravity load combination, rather than the combination with both horizontal and vertical ground motion records. Due to disparities in the total vehicular weight, bridges designed for the HL-93 load required by AASTHO are not safe for the overloaded T3-S2-R4 truck that is critical in Mexico. The discrepancies in reliability are minor for the shorter-span bridges due to variances in the number of axes and the total length, but become higher as the span length increases.

Keywords

Steel bridge Short-span bridge Live load Seismic demands 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Short-span Steel Bridge Alliance (SSSBA) and the Instituto Mexicano de la Construcción en Acero (IMCA) for their technical support.

References

  1. 1.
    Basöz NI, Kiremidjian AS (1995) Prioritization of bridges for seismic retrofitting. Technical Report No. 114, NCEER, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yousif Z, Hindi R (2007) AASHTO-LRFD live load distribution for beam and slab bridges: limitation and applicability. J Bridge Eng 12(6):765–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grandic IS, Grandic D, Bjelanovic A (2014) Evaluation of torsional stiffness in beam and slab bridge decks based on load testing. Int J Civil Eng Trans A: Civil Eng 13(3):255–266Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    OBrien EJ, Cantero D, Enright B, González A (2010) Characteristic dynamic Increment for extreme traffic loading events on short and medium span highway bridges. Eng Struct 32:3827–3835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rahai AR, Fallah Nafari S (2013) A comparison between lumped and distributed plasticity approaches in the pushover analysis results of a PC frame bridge. Int J Civil Eng Trans A: Civil Eng 11(4):217–225Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Majid TA, Yousefi A (2012) Prioritization of highway bridges for seismic retrofitting using multi criteria decision making. In: Proceedings, XV World conference on earthquake engineering, LisbonGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Firouzi A, Rahai AR (2011) Prediction of extent and likelihood of corrosion-induced cracking in reinforced concrete bridge decks. Int J Civil Eng 9(3):183–192Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tarighat A (2013) Model based damage detection of concrete bridge deck using an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system. Int J Civil Eng Trans A: Civil Eng 11(3):170–181Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gómez-Soberón MC, Cruz-Martínez C, Tapia-Hernández E, De León-Escobedo D (2015) Damage variation in common bridge piers with different damage condition and with steel jackets. In: Proceedings, 11th Canadian conference on earthquake engineering, Victoria, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Galambos TV, Tide RH (1970) Composite open-web steel joists. In: Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction AISC, pp 27–36Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Machacek J, Cudejko M (2011) Composite steel and concrete bridge truss. Eng Struct 33:3136–3142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang ZY, Wang QY, Jiang RJ (2015) Finite element based fatigue assessment of corrugated steel web beams in highway bridges. Int J Civil Eng Trans A: Civil Eng 13(4A):419–431Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim Y, Tanovic R, Wight R (2013) A parametric study and rating of steel I-girder bridges subjected to military load classification trucks. Eng Struct 53:709–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Seo J, Phares BM, Dahlberg J, Wipf TJ, Abu-Hawash A (2014) A framework for statistical distribution factor threshold determination of steel-concrete composite bridges under farm traffic. Eng Struct 69:72–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Samuelson D (2002) Composite steel joists. Third quarter, American Institute of Steel Construction, pp 111–120Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    SSSBA (2015) Short-span steel bridge alliance SSSBA, Steel Market Development Institute (SMDI), Washington, DC, www.shortspansteelbridges.org. Accessed 10 Oct 2016
  17. 17.
    AASHTO (2014) AASHTO LRFD bridge design specification, customary United States units. In: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 6th ednGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    N-PRY-CAR-6-01 (2001) Pry. Proyecto. Car. Carreteras, Federal Department of Transportation of Mexico (SCT) (in Spanish)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tena-Colunga A, Mena-Hernández U, Pérez Rocha LE, Avilés J, Ordaz M, Vilar JI (2009) Updated seismic design guidelines for model building code of Mexico. Earthq Spect 25(4):869–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    NOM-012-SCT-2 (2008) Norma Oficial Mexicana sobre el peso y dimensiones máximas con los que pueden circular los vehículos de transporte que transitan en las vías generales de comunicación de jurisdicción federal, Diario Oficial de la Federación (in Spanish)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moreno E, Bustos A, Aguerrebere R, Becerro A (2001) Características del autotransporte público y privado de carga en las carreteras mexicanas. Federal Department of Transportation of Mexico (SCT), Instituto Mexicano del Transporte, Technical publication 167. ISSN 0188-7297 (in Spanish)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ramos MH, Higuera C (2014) Por sismo colapsó puente El Cuajilote en Técpan, Guerrero, Newspaper article, El milenio, 8 May 2014 (in Spanish)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tonantizin P (2014) Colapsa puente en Morelos; hay tres personas heridas, Newspaper article, Excélsior, 26 July 2014 (in Spanish)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    CSI (2011) CSiBridge v. 17. Integrated solution for structural analysis and design. Integrated Computers and Structures, Inc., Berkeley, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    MCBC-04 (2004) Mexico City building code. Gaceta Oficial del Departamento del Distrito Federal 2004 (in Spanish)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Steel Bridge Design Handbook (2015) U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication No. FHWA-HIF-16-002. Federal Highway AdministrationGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Avendaño A, Gómez C, Perea T (2013) Evaluación elástica simplificada por fatiga de un puente de acero tipo ortotrópico bajo cargas móviles típicas de México. In: Proceedings, XIX Mexican Conference of Earthquake Engineering, Veracruz, Mexico (in Spanish)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    IMCA (2014) Manual de Construcción en Acero. Instituto Mexicano de la Construcción en Acero (IMCA), Limusa. Ed. 5. ISBN 9786070506871 (in Spanish)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Scott M, Fenves G (2006) Open system for earthquake engineering simulation, user command-language manual. Report NEES grid-TR 2004-21. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research, University of California, Berkeley, CA. http://opensees.berkeley.edu. Accessed 10 Oct 2016
  30. 30.
    Aviram A, Mackie KR, Stajodinovic B (2008) Guidelines for nonlinear analysis of bridge structure in California. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Report 2008/03, UBC/PEERGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tapia-Hernández E, Perea T, Barth KE, Barker MG (2014) Seismic influence on the short-span steel bridge design. In: Proceedings, 10th U.S. conference in earthquake engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, AnchorageGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Denavit MD, Hajjar JF (2013) Description of geometric nonlinearity for beam-column analysis in OpenSees. Report No. NEU-CEE-2013-02. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Northeastern University, BostonGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Uriz P, Mahin SA (2008) Toward earthquake-resistant design of concentrically braced steel-frames structures. In: Report of Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, PEER 08Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ibarra LF, Medina RA, Krawinkler H (2005) Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration. Earthq Eng Struct Dynamic 34:1489–1511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hsiao P-C, Lehman DE, Roeder CW (2013) A model to simulate special concentrically braced frames beyond brace fracture. Earthq Eng Struct Dynamic 42:183–200. doi: 10.1002/eqe.2202 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Perea T, Esteva L (2005) Componente vertical de registros sísmicos en México y su efecto en la respuesta sísmica no lineal de edificios. Revista de Ingeniería Sísmica, SMIS, No 72, pp 45–79 (in Spanish)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Iran University of Science and Technology 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edgar Tapia-Hernández
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tiziano Perea
    • 1
  • Marco A. Islas-Mendoza
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-AzcapotzalcoMexicoMexico

Personalised recommendations