Effects of Extreme Scour and Soil Subgrade Modulus on Bridge Pile Bent Buckling

Hughes, Doug; Ramey, George E.; Hughes, Mary L.

doi:10.1061/(asce)1084-0680(2007)12:2(96)

Cited by 20 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Note that for the bent pile buckling in the transverse direction, its top fixity is between a pinned and a fixed condition. For this case, Hughes et al (2007) averaged the results calculated by an analytical method (Granholm 1929) for the pinned and fixed condition, and gave a reasonably similar buckling capacity that calculated by the approximate equations (such as P cr = 2p 2 EI/L 2 ). Therefore, when elastic buckling occurs, the averages are also used to estimate the partial fixity condition (50 % rotational fixity with translation restrained at the pile top) in this study as shown in Fig.…”

Section: Deflection Functionsmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…The pinned and 50 % fixity boundary conditions at the pile head, which were employed by Hughes et al (2007) for bridge pile bent, are used in this study for the demonstration purposes as shown in Fig. 1.…”

Section: Analysis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The published results include a model test (Gouvenot 1975) under an initial condition (before scour) and a sensitivity study on the pile buckling capacity to lateral subgrade modulus (Hughes et al 2007) under a scour condition. The number of terms (n values in the deflection functions) used for all calculations in this paper is 50.…”

Section: Verificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Buckling in the bridge longitudinal direction (about pile xx axis) and transverse direction (about pile y-y axis) is considered. The corresponding critical buckling loads calculated by Hughes et al (2007) are compared with the results from present method in Figs. 4 and 5, respectively.…”

Section: Sensitivity Study (Hughes Et Al 2007)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although several approaches are currently available for analyzing buckling of axially loaded piles (Golder and Skipp 1957;Brandtzaeg and Harboe 1957;Davisson 1963;Davisson and Robinson 1965;Reddy and Valsangkar 1970;Prakash 1987;Gabr et al 1997;Heelis et al 2004), only a few studies have been conducted to investigate extreme scour effects on the buckling stability of bridge piles. Hughes et al (2007) presented an investigation of the effects of the extreme scour and the soil subgrade modulus on the buckling capacity of a bridge pile bent. Schambeau et al (2014) developed a screening tool to evaluate the buckling failure of the bridge timber pile bent in extreme scour events.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Extreme scour effects on the buckling of bridge piles considering the stress history of soft clay

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scour is a natural phenomenon caused by the erosion or removal of streambed or bank material from bridge foundations due to flowing water. As the buckling capacity of bridge piles varies inversely with the square of the unsupported pile height, an extreme scour at the pile caused by floodwater could result in a buckling failure of the pile and collapse of the bridge. The common way to analyze the scour-affected buckling stability of bridge piles is to remove the scoured soil layers while possible changes in stress history of the remaining soils are ignored. In reality, however, the remaining soils undergo an unloading process due to scour, and its overconsolidation ratios are increased. In this study, an analytical model with modified lateral subgrade modulus is presented to investigate the extreme scour effect on the buckling of bridge piles in soft clay considering the stress history of the remaining soils. A case study is used to compare the calculated results by considering and ignoring the stress history effect. The results show that ignoring the stress history of the soft clay will overestimate the buckling capacity of bridge pile foundation under scour.

show abstract

Section: Deflection Functionsmentioning

confidence: 64%

Section: Analysis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Verificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sensitivity Study (Hughes Et Al 2007)mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations