Experimental and simulation studies on the mechanical performance of concrete T-Girder bridge strengthened with K-Brace composite trusses

Hou, Peng; Yang, Jing; Pan, Yong; Ma, Changjun; Du, Wenping; Yang, Caiqian; Zhang, Yang

doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2022.06.069

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, under the load mode of the CT, the LDF improvement is more significant, consistent with the results of a previous study. 17 Moreover, the shape of the CT significantly affected the load distribution, and the XCT exerted the most significant effect. Although the different CTs had the same elastic modulus, they exhibited different moments of inertia.…”

Section: Load Distributionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Two CTs were uniformly placed along the PCB bridge span based on previous studies. 17,20,22 They were spaced 3 m apart (one tenth of the span), as shown in Figure 1b.…”

Section: Strengthening Modementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The key point is to use the fabricated CT to replace the diaphragm at the corresponding position to improve the load distribution and reduce the deflection of the bridge. 17 In previous studies, most researchers used X-shaped CT (XCT), triangle-shaped CT (TCT), and K-shaped CT (KCT) to replace diaphragms. Abendroth et al 18 fabricated XCTs to conduct experimental research and numerical simulations on a full-scale prestressed T-beam bridge.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This method offers the advantages of a slight increase in the dead weight, no effect on the regular use of the bridge, and a short construction time. The key point is to use the fabricated CT to replace the diaphragm at the corresponding position to improve the load distribution and reduce the deflection of the bridge 17 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, Chen et al 22 performed single‐point loading to determine the most unfavorable position of a T‐beam bridge strengthened by KCTs. Hou et al 17 prefabricated KCTs with steel to enhance a T‐beam bridge and investigated the strengthening effect under four operating conditions. The results showed that the KCTs reduced the crack width, improved the failure mode and load transverse distribution, and reduced the maximum deflection by 38.6%.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Investigation on mechanical performance of prestressed concrete box‐girder bridge strengthened using composite trusses with different shapes

Hou,

Yang,

Yang

et al. 2024

Structural Concrete

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, a finite element (FE) model of an existing prestressed concrete box‐girder (PCB) bridge is developed using Abaqus/Explicit (2022), and a series of FE simulations are conducted to examine the results of composite trusses (CTs) in strengthening PCB bridges with different shapes. A concrete damage plastic model of concrete is used to predict the nonlinear behavior of concrete. Field tests and theoretical calculations are performed to verify the rationality of the model. Three CTs of different shapes, that is, a K‐shaped composite truss (KCT), an X‐shaped composite truss (XCT), and a triangle‐shaped composite truss (TCT), are used to strengthen the PCB bridge models. The deflection, load distribution, distortion, and surface connection forces under two types of lane loads (European code [EU] and Chinese code [CC]) are discussed. The results show that the CT can reduce the deflection and distortion of the PCB bridge and improve the load distribution. However, the different CT shapes offer other strengthening effects. Among them, the XCT reduces deflection the most significantly, that is, by 8.9% and 17.1% under the two load modes, separately. In addition, the XCT improves the load distribution of the PCB bridge the most significantly. The KCT reduces the distortion of the PCB bridge the most significantly and decreases the stress ratio by 75.36%. Moreover, the deflection of the PCB bridge under the EC is more significant, indicating that the lane load defined by the EC is larger than that by the CC. The maximum surface connection forces are different under the same load mode for the different CTs. However, in all the models, the bending moment at surface‐2 is insignificant. Based on the analysis results, five assumptions are introduced. Using the KCT as an example, the plane model of the reinforced section is simplified, and a canonical equation is established to calculate the load distribution factor. The 324 coefficients and 18 free terms in this canonical equation are deduced, which provides a theoretical basis for strengthening PCB bridges using CTs.

show abstract

Section: Load Distributionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Two CTs were uniformly placed along the PCB bridge span based on previous studies. 17,20,22 They were spaced 3 m apart (one tenth of the span), as shown in Figure 1b.…”

Section: Strengthening Modementioning

confidence: 99%