Analytical and Experimental Investigation of Bridge Girder Shear Distribution Factors

Cross, Brad; Vaughn, Brent; Panahshahi, Nader; Petermeier, David; Siow, Yuen; Domagalski, Thomas

doi:10.1061/(asce)1084-0702(2009)14:3(154)

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cai et al (2004) evaluated the performance of six PC bridges through field testing and FEA, and concluded that barrier stiffness and bearing flexibility have a minor effect, though Li et al (2014) found that even asphalt wearing surfaces may significantly contribute to deck stiffness. Cai (2005) proposed adjustments to the AASHTO DF expressions based on field measurements and FEA results of six steel bridges, while Hughs et al (2006) evaluated AASHTO DFs for PC spread box-girder bridges through field testing and FEA, and Cross et al (2009) conducted an experimental and analytical investigation on twelve steel and PC bridges with regard to shear DFs. Yousif and Hindi (2007), Dicleli and Erhan (2009), Harris (2010), Fanous et al (2011), andPuckett et al (2012) among others, further concentrated on computational modeling to improve DF estimation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field Tests of Two Prestressed-Concrete Girder Bridges for Live-Load Distribution and Moment Continuity

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two similar bridges constructed with a live load continuous connection were tested for live load distribution and joint continuity. Girder distribution factors (GDFs) were compared to AASHTO equivalent values. For positive moments on all girders as for negative moments on interior girders, results using AASHTO equivalent GDFs were found to be generally conservative.However, for negative moments on exterior girders, test results exceeded AASHTO values, with 2-lane results significantly so. GDF results were verified with a FEA model, which produced similar behavior to the field tests. With respect to joint continuity, it is estimated that a simple span would produce a maximum positive moment about 7% higher than the actual structure, while a completely continuous structure would produce a maximum positive moment about 16% lower than the actual structure. For negative moments, the actual structure experienced about 28% of that of a continuous structure. Shear reactions were also investigated.Recommendations are proposed for evaluating transverse distribution of live load as well as the longitudinal distribution of live load, accounting for the effect of joint continuity.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field Tests of Two Prestressed-Concrete Girder Bridges for Live-Load Distribution and Moment Continuity

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The element strains and stresses can then be obtained using the calculated nodal point displacements, the assumed displacement variations, and the material elastic properties of the element. Cross et al [9] conducted experiment test on Illinois bridges and compared the results with results obtained by Finite element results and concluded that Finite element results were in good agreement especially regarding the load distribution of live load through bridge. Finite element software SAP 2000 has used for Finite element analysis of Bridge.…”

Section: Finite Element Methods (Fem)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Analytical and Finite element method of live load distribution in T Beam Girder Bridge

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T-Beam bridges are widely used for short span of varying from 12 m to 25 m because of their cost effectiveness despite of its complexity in analysis. Live load distribution is a crucial step in analysis of any type of bridge since it gives force or moment for which bridge components need to be designed. Among the various methods of live load distribution, comparison between Courbon’s Method, Morice-Little method and Finite element method has carried out herein. Present study aims to determine the most appropriate method of Live load distribution in T Beam Girder Bridge. Total eight bridge models were considered for the purpose of analysis with span varying from 12m to 24m i.e., 12m, 16m, 20m and 24m with three and four girders for each span. Finite element software SAP 2000 has used for Finite element analysis of Bridge. Finite element result were compared with Courbon’s method and Morice little method results.

show abstract

“…The original "S-Over" equation in the AASHTO standard specifications calculates nearly accurate live LDFs for simply supported straight bridges (1). AASHTO standard specifications, however, do not account for the skew effect and therefore predict conservative results for the live load distribution of skewed bridges (2)(3)(4)(5).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Live Load Distribution Factor at the Piers of Skewed Continuous Multicell Box Girder Bridges Subjected to Moving Loads

Mohseni

Khalim

Kang

2015

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The multicell box girder bridge is a popular choice of designers because of its large torsional stiffness. The skewness at the support line of bridges has a significant influence on distribution of live loads. The current American bridge design code, AASHTO load and resistance factor design (LRFD), defines several correction factor expressions to account for the skew effect in bridges. In addition, the effect of skewness on reactions of continuous multicell box girder bridges is obtained by using the skew correction factor of shear or by the shear distribution factor of straight bridges, despite a significant disparity between the shear and reaction that is observed in skewed bridges. This study investigated the effect of skewness on the reactions and shear distribution factors for three continuous multicell box girder bridges. There was a significant difference between reactions at the piers and the shear distribution factors of skewed bridges. Thus, a statistical analysis was used to propose new equations for the skew correction factors and the external girder correction factor of shear and reaction to improve the accuracy of the AASHTO LRFD specifications.

show abstract

Analytical and Experimental Investigation of Bridge Girder Shear Distribution Factors

Cited by 9 publications

References 2 publications

Field Tests of Two Prestressed-Concrete Girder Bridges for Live-Load Distribution and Moment Continuity

Field Tests of Two Prestressed-Concrete Girder Bridges for Live-Load Distribution and Moment Continuity

Comparison of Analytical and Finite element method of live load distribution in T Beam Girder Bridge

Live Load Distribution Factor at the Piers of Skewed Continuous Multicell Box Girder Bridges Subjected to Moving Loads

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About