Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Integral bridges are becoming popular day by day as they are easy to construct
and require less maintenance efforts due to absence of bearings. There is an
increasing tendency to construct long span bridges. However due to movement
restraints fatigue stresses build up that leads to reduction in useful life. In this
study, an effort has been made to estimate the fatigue life of an integral bridge
subjected to transient loads. In this paper, the results of a transient analysis of
an integral bridge of total length 156 m having 5 continuous spans with the
maximum span of 40 m has been done using ANSYS. The roles of deformation
and von-Misses stress that occur in the bridge have been found to influence
fatigue life. Further, midpoint deflection in the longest span, its variation with
loading history and its influence on fatigue life has been analyzed and found to
match satisfactorily with standard results and the same process is applied on
various length of longer span with the concrete variation to develop a
mathematical model for determination of fatigue life.
CHAPTER 1
INTERODUCTION
1.1 General
Integral bridges in the simplest term can be defined as bridges without joints.
Integral bridges are categorized by monolithic connection between the deck
and the substructure (piers and abutments). They are constructed from one
abutment, over intermediate support piers to the other abutment, without any
joint with the deck. Integral bridges have been built all over the world including
India.
Integral bridges are joint less bridges that are used to avoid and
eliminate the characteristic problems related with installing, maintaining, and
repairing deck joints and bearings. As a consequence of having no joints in
integral bridge the problem of replacing and maintaining can be solved,
however, these types bridges experience large amounts of lateral load and
displacement as a result of transient loading that are provided by running
vehicles. This, combined with a complex mechanics of soil-structure interaction,
creates several issues, one of them is the possibility of yielding and deformation
of parts of the bridge, predominantly the bridge deck. This transient loading
occurs in many numbers over daily, monthly and yearly cycles. These cycles
have created concerns for fatigue in these types of structures. A component or
structure that is designed and constructed for carrying a single monotonically
increasing application of static load or designed for cyclic repeated load may
fracture and fail if the same load or an even smaller load is applied cyclically
many times. Let us consider an example of a thin rod that is bent back and
forth, it breaks after a few cycles of such repeated bending. This tendency of
failing is termed as fatigue failure. Examples of structures prone to fatigue
failure are bridges, cranes and slender towers that are subjected to cyclic
loading. Fatigue is the cause of approximately 5090% of all metallic failures
(Stephens and Fatemi, 2001). The fatigue also shows the significant role in the
failure of RC bridges. The fatigue failure occurs due to the propagation of aws
in material under cyclic loading. This failure is partially boosted by the stress
concentration at the tip of such a aw or crack.
Fatigue failure can be dened as a number of fatigue cycles, and in this
way the time taken to reach a predened or threshold failure condition can be
determined. Fatigue failures can be classied into two types, namely, high-cycle
and low-cycle fatigue failures, depending on the number of cycles resulting in
rupture or failure of structure. If the material shows plastic deformation, low-
cycle fatigue is likely to occur. Most of the cases, low-cycle fatigue life is
anticipated in many of these bridges. The load transfer mechanism is very
difficult to predict in this type of structure. If the bridge is free to expand, then
the total load is completely transferred directly to the piles. However, in real
condition, the bridge is constrained on the both ends by the embankment or
backll soil. In such a case, the forces are collectively distributed between the
backll soil or embankment and the piles. Subsequently, the increased vertical
earth pressure may have an reverse effect on the abutment and piers and thus
result in the generation of internal forces. These internal forces generated in
abutments and piers may degrade the concrete material of abutment and pier
and this causes premature failure of bridge. In other hand if the earth pressure
is very high, the concrete abutment and piers will be the one that takes this
pressure. In such case, the piles may not show any signicant movement and
consequently do not deform plastically. Though, the life of the abutment and
pier will get reduced because the concrete of abutment and bridge experiences
a large number of high-amplitude cyclic loads. If the earth pressure in
embankment or backll soil is not too high, the abutments and piers have
exibility to move as a result of expansion of the bridge that are generated due
to transient loading.
Transient loading can be defined as loads and forces that occurs and
varies over a short time interval. A transient load may have referred to any load
that will not remain on the bridge forever. Mostly, these loads include vehicular
live loads and their tributary effects including dynamic load allowance, braking
force, centrifugal force (caused in curved section only), and live load surcharge.
Additionally, there also exist pedestrian live loads, force effects due to uniform
temperature, and temperature gradient, force effects due to settlement of piers,
water loads and stream pressure on piers, wind loads on structure, wind on live
load, friction forces that are generated between vehicle and deck pavement, ice
loads in some areas, vehicular collision forces occurs during accidents, vessel
collision forces, and earthquake loads.
For most ordinary bridges case, there are a few transient loads that are
likely to be considered. That are live loads of vehicle and their subsequently
effects including braking force, centrifugal force, and dynamic load allowance
are the most vital to consider. These subsequently effects shall always be
collective considered with the gravity effects of live loads.
For this study ,only the vehicular load is provided according to Indian
standard IRC-6:2000 and the permanent load include dead load of bridge
structural and nonstructural components, dead load of wearing surfaces over
deck are considered ,For simplicity down drag forces, horizontal earth pressure
loads, vertical pressure due to dead load of earth fill, earth surcharge load, force
effects due to creep ,shrinkage, secondary forces that are generated from post-
tensioning of members, and other miscellaneous locked-in force effects
resulting from the construction process are ignored.
Due to above provided transient loading the bridge deck deflect and
expend and other parts of bridge also shows such tendency of deflection and
expansion. This deflection and expansion will create on the deck and girder that
are xed in to the piers. The girder in this transient case as a fixed beam,
generating a similar type of deformation a consequential from force on the tip
of a beam. If the amount of this deformation is very large, it will result in plastic
deformation of the deck girder. Depending on this system cong and
connections, the mechanical response of the integral bridge may differ
(Baptisteetal.2011; Dicleli and Erhan, 2011; Wagle and Watt ,2011; Kalayci, et
al. 2011).
1.2 Objective
To make an effort to estimate the fatigue life of an integral bridge
subjected to transient loads using ANSYS 17.1.
Table No. 1 Comparison between stress life and strain life approach
S.N. Strain life Stress life
1 Strain Life is excellent for Stress life is widely used for the high
characterizing for low cycle cycle fatigue.
fatigue
2 Strain life is concerned with Stress life is based on total life not
the initiation of crack and its with the crack propagation and
propagation up to failure initiation.
3 Strains typically deals with low Used only for High cycle fatigue
number of cycle, therefore it
addressed result for low cycle
fatigue, but also work fine with
high cycle fatigue.
Strain Life
To calculate Strain Life, the total strain (elastic + plastic) is the required input.
But, running an FE analysis to govern the total response may differ.
f
(2 N )b (2 N )c
2 E f f f
where,
To calculate Strain Life, the total strain (elastic + plastic) is the required input.
But, running an FE analysis to govern the total response may differ.
So, an accepted method is to adopt a nominally elastic response and then by
using Neubers equation to relate local stress/strain to nominal stress/strain at
a location of stress concentration.
Neubers equation
K t2 eS (2)
Local (total ) starin
Local Stress
K Elastic stress Concentration factor
t
e No min al Elastic Strain
S No min al Elastic stress
Thus by solving Eqs (1) and (2) simultaneously, local stress and strain can be
calculated for given elastic inputs. Both the above equation will generate a
nonlinear equation and are required to be solved by iterative method.
Baptiste et al. 2011; Dicleli and Erhan 2011; Wagle and Watt 2011; Kalayci
et al. 2011
There are two types of fatigue failure, namely, high-cycle and low-cycle fatigue
failures, depending on the number of cycles resulting before failure. Normally,
low-cycle fatigue life is experienced by many of bridges. The mechanism for
transfer of load is very complex for bridges and the mechanical response may
vary from structure to structure .
Because of the random nature of loading that occurs in real condition it is very
difficult to show the real loading, some of the data is fabricated and some of the
loading history is applied, these data may not be easily applied to the model.
Typically, a mathematical model needs to be created based on historical data.
There are several different techniques that can be used to model historical data.
Polynomial or sinusoidal types of models can be fit to historical data. However,
sinusoidal models are more common because of their cyclic nature and the fact
that they can easily be fit to the extreme values of load. The extreme values
have a much more pronounced effect than the other parameters in the model.
Basquin (1910)
where
a stress amplitude;
f , fatigue strength coeffcient ,
N f number of cycles to failure, and
b fatigue strength exp onent.
An integral abutment bridge generally goes under cyclic loading and the strain
is well-defined by the length of the bridge and loading. If only plastic strain is
taken into consideration, Coffin-Manson shows a relation that correlates the
number of cycles with plastic strain and the function is called the Coffin-Manson
relation and is as follows:
,f (2 N f )c
2
where
= plastic-strain amplitude,
,f = fatigue ductility coefficient, and
c = fatigue ductility exponent.
In order to obtain a general fatigue model based on total strain sometimes the
Basquin equation Coffin-Manson equation is combined with the Basquin
equation a as follows (Kilinski et al. 1991)
:
t f
'
(2 N f )b 'f (2 N f )c
2 E
where
t total strain amplitude,
'f fatigue strength coefficient,
'f fatigue ductility coefficient,
E Young's modulus,
N f number of cycles to failure, and
b and c = damage model constants.
The Coffin-Manson equation is very useful and it shows good relationship with
experimental result
1
eq ( xx yy )2 ( yy zz ) 2 ( xx zz ) 2 6( yz2 xz2 xy2 )
2
Where,
xx , yy and zz are normal-stress;
xy , xz and xy are shear stress.
1
eq ( 1 2 ) 2 ( 2 3 ) 2 ( 1 3 ) 2
2
Where,
1 , 2 and 3 principal stresses.
when the von-Mises stress eq reaches up to a critical value material starts
yielding and deform plastically and this stress is termed as yield strength .
1 3
eq ( xx yy )2 ( zz xx )2 ( xx zz ) 2 ( xy2 yz2 xz2 )
2(1 ) 2
Where,
=Poissons ratio ;
xx , yy , and zz are normal-strain and
yz , xz , and xy are shear-strain.
1
eq (1 2 ) 2 ( 3 1 ) 2 ( 2 3 ) 2
2(1 )
Where
1 , 2 , and 3 are principal strains
There are two types of fatigue failure, namely, high-cycle and low-cycle
fatigue failures, depending on the number of cycles resulting before failure.
Normally ,low-cycle fatigue life is experienced by many of bridges. The
mechanism for transfer of load is very complex for bridges and the mechanical
response may vary from structure to structure(Baptiste et al. 2011; Dicleli and
Erhan 2011; Wagle and Watt 2011;Kalayci et al. 2011).
The analysis procedure starts with design capture. This includes obtaining
information on the bridge. Like bridge geometry, dimensions, materials used for
construction, architecture, and properties of foundation. (e.g., soil type, pile
depth, type of pile, pile materials, etc.). This gathered information are required
for constructing a software based finite-element (FE) model. For general
consideration, a widely adoptable range of design criteria is used in this paper.
In this paper, after the analysis, the properties like different grade of concrete ,
different span of bridge and different web thickness of girder are considered
and analyzed further.
Integral RC Bridge is modeled of total span of 156 m. Bridge is divided into five
spans of 25m, 30m, 40m, 30m and 25m and 6 piers of 1m width and the height
of bridge is taken as 10 m. Figure shown below shows the length of bridge.
Table 2 Dimensions
Material properties of steel, concrete, and soil are needed to model the
superstructure and substructure. These properties are provided in Table 1. As
mentioned earlier, material nonlinearity should be included, particularly for the
material being investigated for fatigue.
Table 3 Material Properties
S.n. Material Density(Kg/m3) Modulus of elasticity(MPa)
1 Reinforced concrete 2500 50000
2 Steel fe415 7850 200000
In this paper, dead load is taken as the load of bridge model, Live load
according to IRC standard. Further, Impact forces, thermal forces,
frictional resistance of expansion bearings, erection forces, wind load,
seismic load, racking force, force due to curvature and forces due to
parapets are not considered. For live load, standard load case that is
provided by Indian Road Congress (IRC:6-2000) is considered.
Environmental conditions are kept fixed to normal of 34 C in the
modeling of FE model. Thermal expansion and contraction is not
considered and other climate factor like wind loading snow loading etc. are
also neglected.
For the clear distance of 7.5 m between curb a simplified method was
established for slab-on-girder bridges, in order to get the width of each lane of
3.75m. In modeling of bridge the lane width was taken as 3.75 m ,resulting in a
total bridge width of 7.5 m.
The bridges is analyzed for 70-R and Class A loadings by the orthotropic
plate method of Cusens and Pama (1975), which is unified into computer
program ANSYS.
Combination of Live load
The carriageway live load combination shall be considered for the design as
shown in table below.
Table 3 : Combinations of loads for designing
500Kg/m2.
2 From 5.3m to 9.6m 2 One lane of class 70R or two lanes
of class A
3 From 9.6m to 13.1m 3 One lane of class 70R for every
two lanes with one lane of class A
on the remaining lane or 3 lanes
of class A.
4 From 13.1m to 16.6m 4 One lane of class 70R for every
two lanes with one lane of class A
5 From 16.6m to 20.1m 5
for remaining lanes, if any, or one
6 from 20.1m to 23.6m 6 lane of class A for each lane.
There are several different techniques that can be used to model historical data.
Polynomial or sinusoidal types (Arsoy 2000; Hallmark 2000; Dicleli et al. 2003)
of models can be fit to historical data. However, sinusoidal models are more
common because of their cyclic nature and the fact that they can easily be fit to
the extreme values of load. The extreme values have a much more pronounced
effect than the other parameters in the model.
In this study, a FE model of the superstructure and substructure of the integral
bridge has been generated. It is important to model a three dimensional (3D)
bridge so that the state of stress can be determined as well as the location of
maximum stress or strain and their amplitude. Some commercial software or
programming languages can be used to model and further to analyze the
designed FE model. In order to determine the fatigue life, it is essential for
modeling of the nonlinear and plastic behavior of the materials. Most of the
bridges are constructed with steel and concrete.so, it is typically sensible to
include only the inelastic performance of the steel because in concrete, plastic
deformation is typically insignificant compared to steel. Loads such as transient
loads are modeled according to IRC standards, using a mathematical model,
and other type of traffic loads, dead and live loads are also implemented in the
FE modeling. For complete modeling of bridge superstructure and substructure,
more than hundreds of thousands of elements are required to be modeled and
model having millions of degrees of freedom.
3.5 Meshing
One of the most important steps in FE modeling is meshing. The elemental type
that are considered for meshing depends on various factors like, material type
that is used, type of loading and so on.
As stated previously, for study an integral bridge of 156.2 meters long and
having 6 piers of 1m thick are taken. Further, length of long mid span is varied
to 45m, 50m, 55m, 60m, 65m and 70m. The deck is fabricated over 4 main
girder.
Finite element modeling is done using ANSYS 17.1. In most of the cases the
material is experiencing a 3D state of stress. So, a yield criterion like von-Mises
(1996) or Tresca (1864) is required to be determined in order to determine the
state of deformation weather it is elastic or plastic. Either stress, strain, or
energy-based fatigue model is used for determining the fatigue life of integral
bridge depending upon the state of deformation. Typically, bridge substructure
consists of many elements so to determine the fatigue life, it is required to be
identified the section of the bridge deck in which largest amount of energy
released in one cycle of loading or that experiences the largest amount of cyclic
stress or strain amplitude. These values of stress amplitude, strain amplitude
or strain energy released over one cycle of load is used to evaluate fatigue life
of the fatigue model.
3.6.1Fatigue-Damage Model
a f , (2 N f )b
where
a stress amplitude;
f , fatigue strength coeffcient ,
N f number of cycles to failure, and
b fatigue strength exp onent.
In the different type of structure for low cycle fatigue calculation, strain-based
approach to fatigue modeling is most widely used because it uses plastic strain
amplitude. The strain based approach for fatigue life calculation has been used
in various researches for fatigue-life analysis of bridges and structures (Srinivas
et al. 2011; Schulz et al. 1998; Gea and Luo 2004). An integral abutment bridge
generally goes under cyclic loading and the strain is well-defined by the length
of the bridge and loading. If only plastic strain is taken into consideration, Coffin-
Manson shows a relation that correlates the number of cycles with plastic strain
and the function is called the Coffin-Manson relation (Coffin 1954; Manson
1965) and is as follows:
,f (2 N f )c
2
where
= plastic-strain amplitude,
,f = fatigue ductility coefficient, and
c = fatigue ductility exponent.
In order to obtain a general fatigue model based on total strain sometimes the
Basquin equation Coffin-Manson equation is combined with the Basquin
equation a as follows (Kilinski et al. 1991)
t f
'
(2 N f )b 'f (2 N f )c
2 E
where
t total strain amplitude,
'f fatigue strength coefficient,
'f fatigue ductility coefficient,
E Young's modulus,
N f number of cycles to failure, and
b and c = damage model constants.
The Coffin-Manson equation is very useful and it shows good relationship with
experimental result (Mander et al. 1994)
Practically there is no method that disunite plastic strain from total strain during
a typical test so Engelmaier (1983) Uses total strain rather than plastic strain
and proposed a new formula that is based on the Coffin-Manson equation
1
1 c
N f '
2 2 f
where
'f fatigue ductility coefficient,
N f mean cycles to failure,
total shear-strain amplitude, and
c fatigue ductility exponent.
Another fatigue models that are energy-based models are also used for fatigue
modeling (Lee et al. 2000)
For prediction failure caused by fatigue on the basis of hysteresis loops, energy-
based model may be used because cyclic hysteresis energy comprises of both
the stress and the strain hysteresis and is supposed to be a complete metric of
cyclic fatigue damage. One of the model that is commonly used is model of
Akay et al. (1997) and that is based on total energy which was proposed as
1
W k
N f total
W0
where
Wtotal = total strain energy released in one cycle of loading,
N f mean cycles to failure, and W0 and k fatigue coefficients.
on the basis of deformation type (i.e., elastic, plastic, or creep) fatigue life can
be calculated for a model.
Chapter 4
Analysis of bridge model
To determine the fatigue life, the values of stress, strain, or energy obtained
from the FE model are substituted the fatigue model. The average values of
stress, strain, or energy may be substituted depending on how the failure is
defined, in the critical section of deck over the elements across a section and
fatigue life can be calculated by using simply stress, strain, or energy in a
certain element.
Properties
Volume 117.04 m 38.349 m 38.347 m
Mass 9.188e+005 kg 3.0104e+005 kg 3.0102e+005 kg
Centroid X 78. m
Centroid Y -0.9061 m 0.34495 m
Centroid Z 4.6739 m 6.5239 m 7.3472 m 0.15284 m
Moment of Inertia Ip1 1.2041e+005 kgm 28444 kgm
Moment of Inertia Ip2 1.8681e+009 kgm 6.169e+008 kgm
Moment of Inertia Ip3 1.8682e+009 kgm 6.1692e+008 kgm
Statistics
Nodes 536 716 738
Elements 44 84 105
Mesh Metric None
.
Fig 10 Meshed top surface
For analyzing the fatigue performance of integral RC bridge, two vehicle of 100
ton moves from one end to other in both lanes. These types of small bridges
are usually constructed for city traffic so they travel between 40 km/h to 60
km/h. so as per above speed consideration of 40 km/h, To travel this 156 m
distance both vehicle will take 14.01s.
4.4 Reaction at supports
Maximum, minimum and resultant reactions are extracted from the model in
each of six supports.
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
-200000
-400000
-600000
-800000
-1000000
-1200000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time [s] (s)
1000000
Force Reaction (N)
500000
-500000
-1000000
-1500000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time [s] (s)
1500000
1000000
Force Reaction (N)
500000
-500000
-1000000
-1500000
-2000000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1500000
Force Reaction (N)
1000000
500000
-500000
-1000000
-1500000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1500000
1000000
Force Reaction (N)
500000
-500000
-1000000
-1500000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1400000
1200000
Force Reaction (N)
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
-200000
-400000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
800000
Moment reaction (Nm)
600000
400000
200000
-200000
-400000
-600000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1000000
Moment Reaction (Nm)
500000
-500000
-1000000
-1500000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1500000
1000000
Force Reaction (Nm)
500000
-500000
-1000000
-1500000
-2000000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1000000
Moment Reaction(Nm)
500000
-500000
-1000000
-1500000
-2000000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
1000000
Moment Reaction (Nm)
500000
-500000
-1000000
-1500000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
4.5 Deformation
0.00035
0.00030
0.00025
Deformation (X) (m)
0.00020
0.00015
0.00010
0.00005
0.00000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time [s] (s)
1
eq ( xx yy )2 ( yy zz ) 2 ( xx zz ) 2 6( yz2 xz2 xy2 )
2
Where,
xx , yy and zz are normal-stress;
xy , xz and xy are shear stress.
1
eq ( 1 2 ) 2 ( 2 3 ) 2 ( 1 3 ) 2
2
Where,
1 , 2 and 3 principal stresses.
when the von-Mises stress eq reaches up to a critical value material starts
yielding and deform plastically and this stress is termed as yield strength .
1 3
eq ( xx yy )2 ( zz xx )2 ( xx zz ) 2 ( xy2 yz2 xz2 )
2(1 ) 2
Where,
=Poissons ratio ;
xx , yy , and zz are normal-strain and
yz , xz , and xy are shear-strain.
1
eq (1 2 ) 2 ( 3 1 ) 2 ( 2 3 ) 2
2(1 )
Where
1 , 2 , and 3 are principal strains
0.000040
0.000035
Equivalent strain (m/m)
0.000030
0.000025
0.000020
0.000015
0.000010
0.000005
0.000000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)
This model was projected by Koh and Stephens (1991) for determining
of the low-cycle fatigue life and the method was reconsidered (Mander et al.
1994) and correlated with experiments, it showed 98% correlation.
1
eq ( a1 a 2 ) 2 ( a 3 a1 ) 2 ( a 2 a 3 ) 2
2(1 )
failure.
For prediction failure caused by fatigue on the basis of hysteresis loops, energy-
based model may be used because cyclic hysteresis energy comprises of both
the stress and the strain hysteresis and is supposed to be a complete metric of
cyclic fatigue damage. One of the model that is commonly used is model of
Akay et al. (1997) and that is based on total energy which was proposed as
1
W k
N f total
W0
where
Wtotal = total strain energy released in one cycle of loading,
N f mean cycles to failure, and W0 and k fatigue coefficients.
on the basis of deformation type (i.e., elastic, plastic, or creep) fatigue life can
be calculated for a model.
Table 21 Strain Energy
Time [s] Strain Energy [J]
0.50143 308.91
1.0029 796.84
1.5043 712.22
2.0057 327.31
2.5071 222.23
3.0086 641.17
3.51 1214.7
4.0114 1298.7
4.5129 847.91
5.0143 433.09
5.5157 609.11
6.0171 1603.1
6.5186 2955.8
7.02 3657.8
7.5214 3163.
8.0229 2011.7
8.5243 1149.3
9.0257 1014.5
9.5271 1492.3
10.029 2040.2
10.53 2043.
11.031 1565.5
11.533 1200.2
12.034 1333.4
12.536 1796.3
13.037 1939.1
13.539 1548.2
14.04 1297.7
strain Energy
4000
3500
3000
2500
strain Energy (Nm)
2000
1500
1000
500
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time [s] (s)
Hysteresis curve
Total Maximum Equivalent Fatigue life in Fatigue life Fatigue life from
length Span(mid) strain number of cycles (in years) ANSYS 17.1
of Amplitude using (In years)
bridge a 0.0795(2 N f )0.448
156 40m 7.67E-04 1.58E+06 76 79.342
161 45m 8.88E-04 1.14E+06 63 63.964
166 50m 1.01E-03 8.58E+05 54.6 53.234
171 55m 1.13E-03 4.72E+05 43.14 42.234
176 60m 1.25E-03 3.23E+05 37.58 35.8974
181 65m 1.37E-03 2.47E+05 21.75 17.954
186 70m 1.49E-03 9.06E+04 15.24 12.134
Fatigue life was found to be about 76 years in a 156-m-long bridge, and the
fatigue life decreases to 15.24 years in a 186-m-long bridge.
CHAPTER 5
Summary and Conclusion
In this paper, a guideline for conducting fatigue-life analysis for integral bridge
is presented and for the demonstration of the analysis, a parametric study was
presented in which analysis of fatigue life was conducted for span in integral
bridge with different lengths. A variation for the length of the bridge is taken
between 156 and 186 m and the fatigue life was calculated and obtained using
a strain-based fatigue damage modeling. As expected, the fatigue life of bridge
will reduce exponent when the total strain amplitude increases due to increase
in the length of bridge.
Further, the behavior of integral bridge of 156m that was subjected to
transient loading of 70-R as per as IRC:6-2000 is studied. Total 18 types of
variation are considered in length of longer span and model is prepared in
ANSYS 17.1 design modeler.
Fatigue life was found to be about 76 years in a 156-m-long bridge, and the
fatigue life decreases to 15.24 years in a 186-m-long bridge. As the length of
span between two piers increases the fatigue life decreases.
Further Scope
Further it this study can be extended for the other types of bridges like
steel box girder bridge, conventional stone bridge with a more longer span to
predict the fatigue life.
In this study, Integral bridge taken have only two lanes, this study can
further used for multilane bridge subjected to more adverse traffic condition.
The temperature variation due to seasonal and daily variation is not taken into
consideration, that is also an important factor and should be considered for
further progress of this project.