Abstract
A new type of prefabricated abutment with a weak connection is proposed. The longitudinal load (like banking force, earth pressure) distribution of this new type of prefabricated abutment was analyzed based on the hinge-joined slab method. A simplified method for calculating the stiffness parameters of the panels was introduced. The influence lines of the longitudinal load on the prefabricated abutment of an actual bridge were calculated by using the proposed theoretical method and finite element method. The comparison between theoretical calculation and simulation results shows that the theoretical calculation method proposed in this paper is correct. In order to investigate the influence of the different thicknesses of the cap beam and dimensions of prefabricated panels on the calculation error of the theoretical calculation method. The influence lines of the prefabricated abutments with different parameters were calculated theoretically and simulated. All calculation errors of the central values of influence lines were less than 20% when the thickness of the cap beam changes from 0.8 to 2.4 m, the errors were all less than 10% when the thickness of the cap beam was 1.2–1.575 m. This calculation further verified that the theoretical calculation method proposed in this paper is suitable for longitudinal load distribution of a weakly connected Prefabricated bridge abutment. It provides a reference for the design and theoretical calculation of prefabricated abutment.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration): Accelerated bridge construction. Accessed 15 October 2019. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/abc/.
Kurama, Y.C., Sritharan, S., Fleischman, R.B.: Seismic-resistant precast concrete structures: state of the art. American Society of Civil Engineers (2018)
Wang, J.Q., Wang, Z., Gao, Y.F.: Review on aseismic behaviour of precast piers: new material, a new concept, and new application. J. Eng. Mech. 36(3), 1–23 (2019)
Khan, M.A.: Accelerated Bridge Construction: Best Practices and Techniques. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2014)
Alastair, M.A.: Accelerated Bridge Construction (ABC), A better approach to bridge construction. Int. J. Innov. Educ. Res. 4(8), 41–70 (2016)
Xiang, Y.Q., Zhu, S., Zhao, Y.: Research and development on accelerated bridge construction technology. China J. Highway Transp. 31(12), 1–27 (2018)
Khan, M.A.: Accelerated bridge construction. Accelerated Bridge Construction (2015)
Khaleghi, B., Schultz, E., Seguirant, S., et al.: Accelerated bridge construction in Washington State: from research to practice. PCI J. 57(4), 34 (2012)
Hieber, D.G., Wacker, J.M., Eberhard, M.O.: State-of-the-art report on precast concrete systems for rapid construction of bridges. Washington State Transportation Center (2005)
Marsh, M.L.: Application of accelerated bridge construction connections in moderate-to-high seismic regions. Transportation Research Board (2011)
Haber, Z.B., Mackie, K.R., Al-Jelawy, H.M.: Testing and analysis of precast columns with grouted sleeve connections and shifted plastic hinging. J Bridge Eng. 22(10), 04017078 (2017)
Haber, Z.B., Saiidi, M.S., Sanders, D.H.: Behavior and simplified modeling of mechanical reinforcing bar splices. ACI Struct. J. 112(2), 179 (2015)
Culmo, M.P.: Connection details for preprecast bridge elements and systems. United States. Federal Highway Administration. Office of Bridge Technology (2009)
Li, T., Qu, H., Wang, Z.: Seismic performance of precast concrete bridge columns with quasi-static cyclic shear test for high seismic zones. Eng. Struct. 166, 441–453 (2018)
Ameli, M.J., Pantelides, C.P.: Seismic analysis of precast concrete bridge columns connected with grouted splice sleeve connectors. J. Struct. Eng. 143(2), 04016176 (2016)
Ou, Y.C., Wang, P.H., Tsai, M.S.: Large-scale experimental study of precast segmental unbonded post-tensioned concrete bridge columns for seismic regions. J. Struct. Eng. 136(3), 255–264 (2009)
Stephens, M.T., Berg, L.M., Lehman, D.: Seismic CFST column-to-precast cap beam connections for accelerated bridge construction. J. Struct. Eng. 142(9), 04016049 (2016)
Kim, D.H., Kim, M.K., Zi, G.: Experimental test and seismic performance of partial precast concrete segmental bridge column with cast-in-place base. Eng. Struct. 100, 178–188 (2015)
Ichikawa, S., Matsuzaki, H., Moustafa, A.: Seismic-resistant bridge columns with ultrahigh- performance concrete segments. J. Bridge Eng. 21(9), 04016049 (2016)
Yang, C., Okumus, P.: Ultrahigh- performance concrete for post-tensioned precast bridge piers for seismic resilience. J. Struct. Eng. 143(12), 04017161 (2017)
Zhu, Z., Ahmad, I., Mirmiran, A.: Seismic performance of concrete-filled FRP tube columns for bridge substructure. J. Bridge Eng. 11(3), 359–370 (2006)
Moustafa, A., ElGawady, M.A.: Shaking table testing of segmental hollow-core FRP-concrete-steel bridge columns. J. Bridge Eng. 23(5), 04018020 (2018)
Scanlon, A., Aswad, A., Stellar, J.: Precast post-tensioned abutment system and precast superstructure for rapid on-site construction. Transp. Res. Rec. 1814(1), 65–71 (2002)
Dowling, N.E.: Mechanical Behaviour of Materials: Engineering Methods for Deformation, Fracture, and Fatigue. Pearson, London (2012)
Xanthakos, P.P.: Theory and Design of Bridges. Wiley, New York (1994)
Acknowledgements
This research was financially supported by the National Key R&D Program of China under Awards 2017YFC0806000, "5511" Innovation Driven Project of Jiangxi Province (20165ABC28001).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
We declare that we do not have any commercial or associative interest that represents a conflict of interest connected with the work submitted.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
Here, the values of the two kinds of influence lines with 4 panels whose size is b = 3 m, B = 1.8 m, H = 3.115 m are listed. The thickness of cap beam h1 changes from 0.8 m to 2.4 m. The relative error (%) of the central values between the results of FEM and TM and the stiffness parameter are also listed in Tables 4,
5,
and 7
.
Appendix 2
Here, different with Appendix A, the number of precast panels changes to 5. The panels size is unchanged (b = 3 m, B = 1.8 m, H = 3.115 m). The thickness of cap beam h1 still changes from 0.8 m to 2.4 m. The relative error (%) of the central values between the results of FEM and TM and the stiffness parameter are also listed in Tables 8,
9,
Appendix 3
Here, different from Appendix A, the height of panels changes from 3.115 m to 2.5 m. The other sizes of panels size were unchanged (b = 3 m, B = 1.8 m). The thickness of cap beam h1 still changes from 0.8 m to 2.4 m. The relative error (%) of the central values between FEM and TM and the stiffness parameter are also listed in Tables 14, 15, 16 and 17.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Xia, L., Hu, Z. & Shah, Y.I. Longitudinal load distribution of a weakly connected prefabricated bridge abutment. Arch Appl Mech 91, 4121–4140 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00419-021-01995-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00419-021-01995-1