Analysis and Design of Hammer Head Bridge Pier Using Strut and Tie Method

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF HAMMERHEAD BRIDGE PIER USING STRUT AND TIE METHOD.
ABDUL KADIR BIN AHYAT
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA
ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF HAMMERHEAD BRIDGE PIER USING A STRUT AND TIE METHOD.
ABDUL KADIR BIN AHYAT
A project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Engineering (Civil Structure)
Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
DEDICATION
TO MY BELOVED PARENT, HAJI AHYAT BIN MD. NOR AND HAJJAH KAMSIAH BTE BERNEH
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In preparing this thesis, I was in contact with many people, researchers, academicians, and practitioners. They have contributed towards my understanding and thoughts. In particular, I wish to express my sincere appreciation to my main thesis supervisor, Associate Professor Ir. Dr. Wahid Omar, for encouragement, guidance, critics and friendship. I am also very thankful to Mr. Md. Nor, Mr. Jamal from Jurutera Perunding ZAR for their guidance, advices and motivation. Without their continued support and interest, this thesis would not have been the same as presented here.
I am also indebted to University Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) for finding my Master study. Librarians at UTM also deserve special thanks for their assistance in supplying the relevant literatures.
My sincere appreciation also extends to my friends Ir. Kamaruddin Hassan ( JKR Bridge Section, Kuala Lumpur), Ir. Che Husni Ahmad (Consultant), Ir. Azli Shah Bin Ali Bashah (Engineer of Dewan Bandar Raya Kuala Lumpur) and my colleagues who have provided assistance at various occasions. Thanking to all of you in advanced. I am also very thankful to Mr. Md. Nor, Mr. Jamal from Jurutera Perunding ZAR who have provided continued support and assistance in preparing the thesis.
Lastly, I am also deserve special thanks to my beloved wife for her commitment, encouragement while preparing the works and continued support at various occasions.
iii
ABSTRACT.
The main advantages of truss model are their transparency and adaptability to arbitrary geometric and loading configuration. In strut-and-tie modeling, the internal stresses are transferred through a truss mechanism. The tensile ties and compressive struts serve as truss members connected by nodal zones. The advantages have been thrust into the back ground by several recent developments of design equations based on truss models, The present study is focus on developing a uniform design procedure for applying the strut-and-tie modeling method to hammerhead pier. A study was conducted using
hammerhead piers that were previously designed using the strength method specified by code. This structure was completed and had put into service. During the inspection, cracks were observed on the piers. The scope of this study is to highlight the application of a newer generation strut-and-tie model, which is not practice at the time of the original design. Depth to span ratios varies from 1.5 to 2.11 and the girders are transferring loads very close to the support edge, making these hammerheads ideals candidates for strut-and-tie application. This study only focus on comparison the reinforcement detail drawing produce previously designed using the strength method, and reinforcing requirement using strut-and-tie model. Based on the design studies, a well-defined procedure for designing a hammerhead pier utilizing the strut-and-tie model was established that may be used by bridge engineers. There could be numerous reasons for the crack to develop. Shrinkage, stress concentration or some erection condition may be a few of them.
iv
ABSTRAK.
Kelebihan model strut and tie ia ketelusan melihat kerangka yang di cadangkan dan memudahkan melihat dan meramalkan kedudukan beban yang dikenakan terhadap struktur yang di cadangkan.
Analisis mengikut model strut and tie mengunakan kaedah kekuatan mampatan dan kaedah kekuatan tegangan yang saling bertindak diantara satu sama lain hasil daripada ikatan disetiap nod. Kebaikan analisis mengunakan kaedah kekuatan mampatan dan kekuatan tegangan yang saling betindak diantara mereka telah membuat pengkaji cuba membangunkan kaedah rekabentuk berpandukan kaedah model strut and tie model.
Kajian ini menjurus untuk memajukan satu kaedah yang setara untuk merekabentuk menggunakan kaedah model strut and tie untuk tiang Jambatan berbentuk T. Kajian ini dikendalikan menggunakan struktur tiang jambatan berbentuk T yang telah direkabentuk terlebih dahulu menggunakan analisa kekuatan lentur mengikut keperluan amalan rekabentuk.
Struktur ini telah siap dibina dan dibuka untuk kegunaan lalulintas. Semasa pemerhatian terhadap struktur tersebut didapati ada beberapa rekahan di permukaan dinding struktur. Bidang kajian ini adalah untuk menunjukkan penggunaan analisis model strut and tie model yang masih dalam peringkat pembangunan boleh diguna pakai untuk mereka bentuk struktur tersebut. Nisbah ketinggian dinding tembok dan panjang rasuk adalah berbeza diantara 1.5 hingga 2.11 dan beban yang terletak diatas rasuk tersebut, hampir dengan kedudukan tiang rasuk, ini membuatkan struktur tersebut amat sesuai untuk dianalisis mengunakan kaedah analisis model strut and tie .
v Hasil daripada kajian rekabentuk ini, satu kaedah rekabentuk mengunakan tindak balas struktur strut and tie dapat dimajukan untuk dicadangkan untuk merekabentuk struktur tiang jambatan berbentuk T, yang mana boleh digunakan oleh Jurutera Jambatan.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENT
CHAPTER
TITLE Title Page Declaration Dedication Acknowledgement Abstract Abstrak Table of Content List of Tables List of Figure List of Symbols
PAGE i ii iii iv v vi viii xi xii xiii ivx xv xvi
INTRODUCTION
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
Introduction Problem Statement Objective Scope of Study
1 1 3 3
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4
Introduction Overview of Strut-and-Tie Model Adequate Selection of Truss Members General Strength of Truss Members
5 6 8 12
vii 2.4.1 2.4.1.1 2.4.1.2 2.4.1.3 2.4.1.4 2.4.5 2.4.6 2.5 2.6 2.6.1 2.6.2 Strength Requirement Rule in Selecting Strut-and-Tie Models Strength of Tensile Tie Strength of Compressive Strut Node Strength Anchorage Requirements (ACI A.4.3) Serviceability Requirement (ACI RA.2.1) Shear Concerns in Strut-and-Tie Models AASTHO AND LRFD SPECIFICATION Introduction AASHTO Standard Code Specification for the Design of Reinforced Concrete Member 2.6.3 2.6.4 2.6.5 Design for Flexure Design for Shear AASHTO LRFD Standard Code Specification for the Design of Reinforced Concrete member using Strut-and-Tie Model 2.6.5.1 2.6.5.2 2.6.5.3 Compression Struts Tension ties Nodal Zones 29 30 31 32 23 25 28 23 13 13 14 14 16 19 19 20
METHODOLOGY
3.1 3.2 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3
Introduction Description of Design Procedures The Structure Model Load Generation Procedure Analytical Method
34 36 36 37 39
viii 3.2.4 Strut-and-Tie Model Truss Background for Hammerhead Pier 3.2.5 3.3 Pier Design Procedure Typical Bridge Hammerhead Pier Analysis / Design 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.3.4 Project Description Original Analysis / Design Strut-and-Tie Analysis / Design Strut-and-Tie Analysis / Design For Phase 1 3.3.5 Strut-and-Tie Analysis / Design For Phase 2 3.3.6 Strut-and-Tie Analysis / Design For Phase 3 3.3.7 Strut-and-Tie Analysis / Design For Phase 4 3.4 Typical Bridge Hammerhead Pier Design Example 3.4.1 3.4.1.1 Design Example 1 Steel Reinforcement for Main Tension ties 3.4.1.2 3.4.1.3 3.4.2 3.4.2.1 Calculation for Inclined Strut Secondary Reinforcement Design Example 2 Steel Reinforcement for Main Tension ties 3.4.2.2 3.4.2.3 3.4.3 3.4.3.1 Calculation for Inclined Strut Secondary Reinforcement Design Example 3 Steel Reinforcement for Main Tension ties 74 68 69 71 74 62 63 65 68 62 62 53 50 47 44 42 42 42 42 40 40
ix 3.4.3.2 3.4.3.3 Calculation for Inclined Strut Secondary Reinforcement 75 77
RESULT AND ANALYSIS
4.1 4.2 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.3
Introduction Analysis of Result Possibility of Cracking Phase Construction Discussion of Results
81 81 82 82 83
DESIGN RECOMMENDATION
5.1 5.2
Introduction Recommendation Strut-and-Tie Design Procedure For Hammerhead piers
84
84 84 84
5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3
Determination of Load Defining the Truss Model Dimensioning of Tensile Ties, Compressive Struts and Nodal Zones
86
SUMMARY AND CONLUSION 6.1 6.2 Summary Conclusions 89 90
REFERENCES
93
LIST OF TABLES.
TABLE NO.
TITLE
PAGE
3.1 3.2 3.3
Load Cases Definition Tabulated estimated Load Tabulated Member Forces For Each Construction Phases
39 43 56
xi
LIST OF FIGURES.
FIGURE NO
TITLE
PAGE
2.1 2.2 2.3
B-Region and D-Region ACI Section 10.7.1 For Deep Beam Example strut-and-tie model, And acceptable Model and Poor Model
7 8 10
2.4 2.5 2.6
Basic Type of Strut in a 2-D Member Basic Type of Strut in a 2-D Member Illustrates some typical example of singular and smeared nodes.
12 15 18
2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.11
Inclined cracking Truss like action Analogous truss Truss analogy Application of sectional design model and strut-and-tie model for series of beams tested by Kani (1979), adapted from Collins and Mitchell (1991)
20 20 20 21 21
2.12 2.13
Rectangular Section with Tension Reinforcement Only. Rectangular Section with Compression and Tension Reinforcement
25 26
3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5
Reinforcing pattern provide by original design 3D structure model Load case condition 3D strut and tie model 2D strut and tie model
35 37 38 41 43
xii 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 3.11 3.12 3.13 3.14 3.15 3.16 3.17 3.18 3.19 3.20 Proposed Load Application for Phase 1 Result of Force in Member Result member deflected shape Proposed Load Application for Phase 2 Result of Force in Member Result member deflected shape Proposed Load Application for Phase 3 Result of Force in Member Result member deflected shape Proposed Load Application for Phase 4 Result of Force in Member Result member deflected shape Maximum Members Force Transverse tension in strut between node N1 and N2 Reinforcing pattern analyses using strut-and-tie-model 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 61 67 80
xiii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
a As Ac An
= = = =
depth of the compression block the required area of steel cross sectional area at the end of Strut area of a Nodal Zone face in which the force is framing, measured perpendicular to the direction of the force.
b bw d D DA DR fc fcu fy Fi Fn Fu li Mn Nu Pn Pu Vc Vn W
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
width of concrete section the width of web depth from extreme compression fibres to reinforcing steel depth of the nodal zone available effective depth Required effective depth concrete compressive strength. effective compressive strength and the tie yield strength force in strut or tie i nominal strength of Strut, Tie, or Node, and factored force demand of the Strut, Tie, or Node. length of member i nominal moment capacity the factored tie force nominal resistance of strut or tie ultimate capacity of strut or tie the nominal shear strength provided by the concrete the factored shear force at the section considered width of the nodal zone
xiv
s s s
= = =
1.00 for prismatic Struts in uncracked compression zones, 0.04 for Struts in tension members, 0.75 if Struts may be bottle shaped and crack control reinforcement is included,
0.60 if Struts may be bottle shaped and crack control reinforcement is not included, and
s n n n
= = = = =
0.60 for all other cases. 1.00 0.80 0.60 if Nodes are bounded by Struts and/or bearing areas, if Nodes anchor only one Tie, and if Nodes anchor more than one Tie.
strength reduction factor, mean strain of member i steel ratio of the i-th layer of reinforcement crossing that strut angle between the axis of a strut and the bars
mi vi i
= = =
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Introduction
Strut-and-tie modeling is an analysis and design tool for reinforced concrete elements in which it may be assumed that internal stresses are transferred through a truss mechanism. The tensile ties and compressive struts serve as truss members connected by nodal zones. The internal truss, idealized by the strut-and-tie model, implicitly account for the distribution of both flexure and shear.
1.2
Problem Statement
Three procedure are currently used for the design of load transferred members such as deep beams: Empirical design method Two or three dimensional analysis, either linear or nonlinear By mean of trusses composed of concrete struts and steel tension ties.
Strut and tie model is considered a rational and consistent basis for designing cracked reinforced concrete structure. It is mainly applied to the zones where the
2 beam theory does not apply, such as geometrical discontinuities, loading points, deep beams and corbels.
The main advantage of truss model are their tranparency and adaptability to arbitrary geomatric and loading configuration. In strut-and-tie modelling, the
internal stresses are tranferred through a truss mechanism. The tensile ties and compressive struts serve as truss members connected by nodal zones. The
advantages have been thrust into the back ground by several recent developements of design equations based on truss models,
In 1998, the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Specifications (1998) incorporated the strut and tie modeling procedure for the analysis and design of deep reinforced concrete members where sectional design approaches are not valid. In most instances, hammerhead piers can be defined as deep reinforced concrete members and therefore, should be designed using the strut-and-tie modeling approach. However, most bridge engineers do not have a broad knowledge on the strut-and-tie model due to the unfamiliarity with the design procedure. Therefore, it is likely that, with the formulation of a well-defined strut-and-tie modeling procedure, practicing engineers will become more comfortable with the design method and therefore, employ the method more often and consistently.
The succesful application of a strut-and-tie model depend on a reliable visualization of the path of the force flows. In a typical strut-and-tie analysis, the force distribution is visualised as compressive struts and tensiles ties, respectively.
3 1.3 Objectives
The specific objectives of the study are: To ascertain the degree of strut-and-tie modeling implementation. To compare the flexure and shear reinforcing requirements for typical hammerhead type bridge piers using both strut-and-tie modeling and standard sectional design practices, and To develop a uniform design procedure for employing strut-and-tie modeling for hammerhead piers.
Most codes of practice use sectional methods for designed of conventional beams under bending and shear. ACI building Code 318M-95 assumes that flexure and shear can be handle separately for the worst combination of flexure and shear at a given section. The interaction between flexure and shear is addressed indirectly by detailing rules for flexural reinforcement cutoff point.
1.4
Scope of Study
In these study pier caps was designed using the strut-and-tie modeling procedure and the results compared to the results of the sectional design method. By comparing the results, the reduction or increase in the flexural steel and the shear steel can be quantified.
These new procedure can provide rational and safe design framework for structural concrete under combined actions, including the effects of axial load, bending and torsion.
4 In addition specific checks on the level of concrete stresses in the member are introduced to ensure sufficient ductile behavior and control of diagonal crack widths at service load level.
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
INTRODUCTION
The strut and tie models have been widely used as effective tools for designing reinforced concrete structures. The idea of a Strut-and-Tie Model came from the truss analogy method introduced independently by Ritter [1] and Morsch [2] in the early 1900s for shear design. This method employs so called Truss Models as its design basis. The model was used to idealised the flow of forced in a cracked concrete beam. In parallel with the increasing availibility of the experimental results and the developement of limit analysis in the plastcity theory, the truss analogy method has been validated and improved considerably in the form of full member or sectional design procedures. The Truss Model has also been used as the design basis for torsion.
Later, Schlaich, et al [3] worked to combined individual research conducted on various reinforced concrete elements in such a fashion that Strutand-Tie modeling could be used for entire structure. Strut-and-Tie modeling is an analysis and design tool for reinforced concrete elements in which it may be assumed that flexural and shearing stresses are tranferred internally in a truss type member comprised of concrete compressive struts and steel reinforcing tension ties. It should be noted that while the shear design is theoritically couple with the truss model, in most instances
6 designers perform a separate check for providing additional strirrup type shear reinforcement.
Several theoretical and experimental studies had been carried out to analyses the phenomenon of the shear failure of reinforced concrete beams. During the past few years design codes ACI [4] and AASHTO [5] have adopted Strut-and-tie principles for the design deep beam members. The definition of deep section provided by these specification classifies most hammerhead piers as deep beam.
This literature review is conducted to establish the state of knowledge with regard the possible crack to the hammerhead bridge. The argument has been arise on theoritical method which are most applicable to this type of structure. Strutand-tie modeling is an analysis and design tool for reinforced concrete which are most suitable for the hammerhead bridge pier but a comparison must be made with beam theory in order to make a comparison with the actual behaviour of the structure . A comparison will be made on the analytical model on the design the hammerhead piers using the strength design method as specified by the standard specification in order to evaluate strut-and-tie modeling. This study will help to focus on developing design procedure for applying to hammerhead bridge pier.
2.2 Overview of Strut-and-Tie Modeling
Strut-and-Tie Method (STM) has been used for several years in Europe and had been included in the AASHTHO LRFD [5] Bridge Specification since 1994, it is a new concept for many structural engineers, recommendation for the used of STM to design reinforced concrete members were discuss by previous researchers. In selecting the appropriate design approach, focused on
understanding the internal distribution of forces in a reinforced concrete structure and have defined two specific regions; B-Regions and D-Regions as shown in Figure 2.1. The B-Regions of a structure (where B stands for Beam, Bending, or
7 Bernoulli Beam theory may be employed) have internal states of stress that are easily derived from the sectional forces e.g. bending, shear, etc.
Figure 2.1 ( B-Region and D-Region)
For structural members that do not exhibit plane strain distribution, e.g. the strain distribution is non-linear, the sectional force approach in not applicable. These regions are called D-Regions (where D stands for discontinuity, disturbance, or detail). The D-Regions of a structure are normally corners, corbels, deep sections, and areas near concentrated loads. When D-Regions crack the treatments used such as "detailing," "past experience," and "good practice" often prove inadequate and inconsistent Schlaich, et al [3].
Figure 2.2 ACI [4] Section 10.7.1 For Deep Beam: ACI Section 11.8 For L/d < 5/2 for continuous span For L/d < 5 Shear requirement For L/d < 5/4 for simple span
Figure 2.2 provided a simple strut-and-tie model applied to a simply supported deep beam. In this figure, the lighter shaded region represent concrete compressive struts, the steel reinforcing bar represent a tensile tie, and the dark shared regions represent nodal zones.
The tension ties in the truss model may represent one or several layers of flexural reinforcement in the deep section. The locations of the tension ties normally are defined at the centroid of reinforcing mat.
2.3
Adequate Selection of Truss Members
The successful application of a strut-and-tie model depends on a reliable visualization of the paths of force flow. In a typical strut-and-tie analysis, the force distribution is visualized as compressive and tensile force flows that are modeled as compressive struts and tensile ties.
The engineering judgment and an iterative procedure required to produce an adequate reinforcement pattern for a given member. The process of defining the truss begins by defining the flow of forces in the member and locating the nodal zones at points where the external loads act and the loads are transferred between structural members, e.g. the pier cap to pier column or at the supports. The tension ties and compression struts can then be located once the nodal zones have been defined.
The tension ties are located at the assumed centroid of tensile reinforcing beginning and terminating at nodal zones. The compression struts are defined to coincide with the compressive field and, as with the tensile ties, begin and terminate at the nodal zones.
9 The truss should exhibit equilibrium at each node and should portray an acceptable truss model. The good model is should be more closely approach to the elastic stress trajectories. The poor model requires large deformation before the tie can yield, break the rule that concrete has a limited capacity to sustain plastic deformation. Figure 2.3 illustrates the difference between an acceptable model and a poor model.
Figure 2.3 Example strut-and-tie model, An acceptable Model and Poor Model (This figure cited from lecture note Dr.C.C. Fu, Ph.D, P.E, University of Maryland)
In a cracked structural concrete member, loads are tranmitted through a set of commpressive stress fields that are distributed and interconnected by a tensile stress fields. The flow of compressive stresses can be idealised using compression
10 members called strut, and tension stress fields are idealised using tension member called ties. Since reinforced ties are much more deformable than concrete struts, the model with the least and shortest ties should provide the most favorable model. Schlaich et al., proposes a simple criterion for optimizing a model that derived from the principle of minimum strain energy for linear elastic behavior of the struts and ties after cracking. The contribution of the concrete struts can generally be omitted because the strains of the struts are usually much smaller than those of the steel ties. An ideal arrangement of ties and strut to minimise both the forces in the various component element, and the length of the elements. This is formulated as a design criterion by as follows. Schlaich, et al [3] n Fili Where Fi li
mi mi
= Minimum
= force in strut or tie i = length of member i = mean strain of member i
Strut-and-Tie Modeling of Structural Concrete by Dr. Quang Quan Liang at al [6], School of Civil and Enviromental Engineering, The University of New South Wales, Sydney Australia developed a performance-based strut-and-tie modeling procedure for reinforced concrete citing the inefficiency of the trialand-error iterative process that is based on the designers intuition and past experience. Their optimization procedure consists of eliminating the most lowly stressed portions from the structural concrete member to find the actual load path. Liang, et al [6], proposes that minimizing the strain energy is equivalent to maximizing the overall stiffness of a structure and that the strut-and-tie system should be based on system performance (overall stiffness) instead of component performance (compression struts and tension ties).
11
2.4
General Strength of Truss Members
Struts are the compression members of a strut-and-tie model and represent concrete stress fields whose principal compressive stresses are predominantly along the centerline of the strut. The idealized shape of concrete stress field surrounding a strut in a plane (2-D) member, however, can be prismatic Figure 2.4(a), bottle-shaped Figure 2.4(b), or fan-shaped Figure 2.4(c). Struts can be strengthened by steel reinforcement, and if so, they are termed reinforced struts.
Figure 2.4
Basic Type of Struts in a 2-D Member: (a) Prismatic (b) Bottle-
Shaped (c) Fan-Shaped (This figure cited from lecture note Dr.C.C. Fu, Ph.D, P.E, University of Maryland)
Ties are the tension members of a strut-and-tie model. Ties mostly represent reinforcing steel, but they can occasionally represent prestressing steel or concrete stress fields with principal tension.
As previously stated, the truss model is comprised of tension ties, compression struts, and nodal zones. For the adequate design of the reinforced concrete member, the elements of the truss model must be sized. The following
12 sections present the general strength of the tensile ties, compressive struts, and nodal zones.
2.4.1 Strength Requirement
The American Concrete Institute [4] (ACI) introduces the Strut-and-Tie Method as a design method for D-Region problems in 2002 edition of ACI 318 Code [4]. The provisions consist of five sections these provisions are summarized as follows:
2.4.1.1
Rules in Selecting Strut-and-Tie Models
In designing using the Strut-and-Tie Method, a Strut-and-Tie Model representing idealized load-transfer mechanism in the D-Region under consideration is to be selected (A.2.1). The selected Strut-and-Tie Model should consists of Struts, Ties, and Nodes (A.2.1) and has to be in equilibrium with the forces acting on the D-Region (A.2.2). The finite dimensions of Strut-and-Tie Model components, representing the stress fields of Struts, Ties, and Nodes, should be considered (A.2.3). Tie stress fields can cross Strut stress fields (A.2.4). To avoid severe strain incompatibility between Struts and Ties, the angle between a Strut and a Tie framing into a Node cannot be smaller than 25 degrees (A.2.5).
The Strut-and-Tie Model components must have sufficient capacity to resist the force demand such that (A.2.6)
Fn where:
Fu
= Fn = Fu =
strength reduction factor, nominal strength of Strut, Tie, or Node, and factored force demand of the Strut, Tie, or Node.
13
2.4.1.2
Strength of Tensile Ties
In order to simplify the equilibrium analysis of a strut-and tie model it is often convinient to combine a number of separate and parallel reinforcing bars and represent them as a single tie. According to ACI, the tension tie can be designed with the straightforward approach of dividing the factored tie force by the yield strength of the reinforcing steel and is expressed as follows (Kuchma and Tjhin, 2001; ACI, 2001):
As > Nu /
fy
where Nu = the factored tie force fy = the tie yield strength = resistance factor As = the required area of steel
The care must be exercised in the strut-and-tie as the real distribution of bars, of the tensile reinforcement and also in the selection of how to distribute and anchor the reinforcement. This becomes apparent due to the ability of the joint or nodal zone to transfer forces between the strut-and-tie is dependent on the surface area of the reinforcement, the height over which it is distributed, the length of the node, and the type of anchorage method that is employed. ACI and AASHTO have provisions, which require the tie reinforcement be distributed over such a height that if the tie were anchored on the far side of the node that the nodal stress limit value will not be exceeded (Kuchma and Tjhin, 2001).
14
2.4.1.3 Strength of Compressive Strut
a.
Strut Strength (ACI A.3)
Struts are the compression members of a strut-and-tie model and represent concrete stress fields whose principal compressive stresses are predominantly along the centerline of the strut. The idealized shape of concrete stress field surrounding a strut in a plane (2-D) member, however, can be prismatic Figure 2.5(a), bottle-shaped Figure 2.5(b), or fan-shaped Figure 2.5(c) Schlaich at el [7]. Struts can be strengthened by steel reinforcement, and if so, they are termed reinforced struts.
Figure 2.5 Basic Type of Struts in a 2-D Member: (a) Prismatic (b) BottleShaped (c)Fan-Shaped
In the design using strut-and-tie models, it is necessary to check that the crushing of the compressive strut does not occur. Struts are the compression members of a Strut-and-Tie Model and represent concrete stress fields represent one dimensional stress fields, which should not exceed the compressive strength of the concrete. Cracking may develop in bottle shaped elements if no crack control reinforcement is used. ACI [4] uses the following formula to limit the compressive stress in the strut (ACI, 2001).
The nominal strength of a Strut, Fns , is defined as Fns = fcu Ac
15 where:
fcu = Ac =
effective compressive strength and cross sectional area at the end of Strut.
The effective compresive strength, fcu , is defined as fcu = 0.85 where:

s
fc
s s s
= 1.00 for prismatic Struts in uncracked compression zones, = 0.04 for Struts in tension members, = 0.75 if Struts may be bottle shaped and crack control is included, = 0.60 if Struts may be bottle shaped and crack control is not included, and = 0.60 for all other cases. = concrete compressive strength.
reinforcement
s
reinforcement
s
fc
The ACI [4] code equation accounts for when struts are prismatic, tapered, or bottle shaped and whether transverse reinforcement is or is not provided. ACI [4] also gives the following equation for the required amount of crack control reinforcement: n
vi
sin
0.003
where
vi i
= steel ratio of the i-th layer of reinforcement crossing that strut
= angle between the axis of a strut and the bars
2.4.1.4 Node Strength
16
Nodal zones (the joints of the truss) are formed where tension ties, compression struts, and exterior loads intersect. To allow safe transfer of strutand-tie forces through the nodal zones, concrete stress levels must be controlled. The strength of concrete in the nodal zones depends on Yun and Rameriz [8] The confinement of the zones by reactions, compression struts, anchorage plates for prestressing, reinforcement from the adjoining members and hoop reinforcement, The effects of strain discontinuities within the nodal zone when ties strained in tension are anchored in, or across, a compressed nodal zone, and The splitting stresses and hook-bearing stresses resulting from the anchorage of the reinforcing bars of a tension tie in or immediately behind a nodal zone.
When a node is introduced into a model it is implied that the internal forces change directions abruptly. In reality, the force changes directions over a certain length and width. This yields two types of nodes based on the length and width of the node; singular and smeared. Singular nodes are encountered when forces tend to be locally concentrated and the deviation of the forces tends to be locally concentrated. Conversely, if a strut or tie represents a wide stress field the node can be considered a smeared node. Figure 2.6 illustrates some typical examples of singular and smeared nodes Schlaich et al.[9].
17
Figure 2.6 illustrates some typical examples of singular and smeared nodes (Schlaich et al., 1987).
a.
Node Strength (ACI A.5)
The nominal strength of a Nodal Zone, Fnn, is defined as Fnn = fcu An
18 where:
fcu = An =
effective compressive strength and area of a Nodal Zone face in which the force is framing, measured perpendicular to the direction of the force.
The effective compresive strength, fcu, is defined as fcu = 0.85

n
fc,
where:
n n n
= 1.00 if Nodes are bounded by Struts and/or bearing areas, = 0.80 if Nodes anchor only one Tie, and = 0.60 if Nodes anchor more than one Tie.
fc = concrete compressive strength
2.4.5 Anchorage Requirements (ACI A.4.3)
The Tie reinforcement must be properly anchored in the Nodal Regions at the ends of the Tie such that the corresponding Tie force can be developed at the point where the centroid of the reinforcement in the Tie leaves the Extended Nodal Zone. An extended Nodal Zone is a region bounded by the intersection of the Effective Strut Width and the Effective Tie Width.
2.4.6 Serviceability Requirements (ACI RA.2.1)
Design based on Strut-and-Tie Models should satisfy the serviceability requirements provisions in the body of the code can be applied.
19 2.5 Shear Concerns in Strut-and-Tie Models
Truss analogy assumes that a pattern of parallel inclined crack forms in region of high shear, indicated in Figure 2.7 (Inclined cracking) and that the concrete in between adjacent inclined cracks can carry an inclined compressive force, and hence act like a diagonal strut. This suggests that if tranverse stirrups are provided at a regular interval along the beam, truss like action can be achieved whereby the main reinforcement provide longitudinal tension chord and the compressive concrete on the other side of the beam the longitudinal compressive chord. In the analogous truss shown in Figure 2.8 (Truss like action), the tranverse reinforcing steel is vertical but clearly truss action can also be achieved with inclined steel stirrups.
A feature of truss method is that the forces in the stirrups and the diagonal strut can be determined using simple statics. For example, in Figure 2.9 (analogous truss) the strut is inclined at degrees while stirrup is verticle, so that
the shear force acting in a cross-section is carried by the verticle component of the diagonal compressive force D: D sin =V
Figure 2.7 - Inclined cracking
Figure 2.8 - Truss like action
20
Figure 2.9 - Analogous truss
Figure 2.10 Truss analogy
By considering the joint in Figure 2.10 (Truss analogy), we can see that the force Vs in the stirrup is equal to the shear forve. With the stirrup spacing s and the beam depth d, the number of stirrup n is determine by their spacing s and the angle n = d / s tan
In common case, the inclined crack cut n stirrups and these together carry the applied shear force V. Figure 2.11 compares the experimentally determined shear strength of the series of beam tested using sectional design model and strutand-tie models Collins and Mitchell [10]. In these tests, the shear span-to-depth ratio a/d was varied from 1 to 7 and no web reinforcement was provided. At a/d values less than 2.5, the resistance is governed by strut-and-tie action, with the resistance dropping off rapidly as a/d increased.
The test showed that for span-to-depth ratios from 1 to 2.5 the shear is carried by strut-and-tie action; however, over the 2.5 ratio a sectional model
21 transfers the shearing stress. The findings of Kani et al. [11] would further support the ability of the truss model to transfer the shear in disturbed regions near supports and point loads. However, bridge designers are typically uncomfortable with the idea of not using shear reinforcement and therefore after a strut-and-tie has been developed most engineers have then also conducted a sectional analysis to detail additional shear reinforcement.
Figure 2.11 Application of sectional design model and strut-and-tie model for series of beams tested by Kani [11], adapted from Collins and Mitchell [10]
23
2.6
AASHTO LFD AND LRFD SPECIFICATIONS
2.6.1
Introduction
With
the
implementation
of
the
AASHTO
LRFD
[12]
Bridge
Specifications, bridge designers were presented with a new approach in the design of deep reinforced concrete sections, the strut-and-tie design method. While strut-and-tie modeling has been employed in the past for various reinforced concrete designs, the introduction of the AASHTO LFRD [12] Specifications marks the first time it is presented as a suggested design procedure. This chapter outlines the procedures used in both the AASHTO [5] Standard Specifications and the AASHTO LRFD [12] Specifications for the design of deep concrete sections. Additionally, a survey of State Transportation Departments was conducted to determine design practice currently used for hammerhead type piers. Results of this survey are summarized in this chapter.
2.6.2 AASHTO Standard Code Specifications for the Design of Reinforced Concrete Members
Generally, the design strength of a given member is in terms of moment, shear, or stress. In the strength design method, a nominal strength is calculated and then reduced by a factor normally expressed as . Article 8.16.1.2.2 of the Standard Specifications gives the following strength-reduction factors (for shear and moment), , shall be as follows (AASHTO [5]: (a) Flexure. (b) Shear = 0.90 = 0.85
Section 8.16.2 presents several design assumptions used in the strength design method for reinforced concrete and are as follows:
8.16.2.1 The strength design of members for flexure and axial loads shall be based on the assumptions given in this Article, and on the
24
satisfaction of the applicable conditions of equilibrium of internal stresses and compatibility of strains. 8.16.2.2 The strain in reinforcement and concrete is directly proportional to the distance from the neutral axis. 8.16.2.3 The maximum usable strain at the extreme concrete compression fiber is equal to 0.003. 8.16.2.4 The stress in reinforcement below its specified yield strength, fy, shall be Es times the steel strain. For strains greater than
thatcorresponding to fy, the stress in the reinforcement shall be considered independent of strain and equal to fy. 8.16.2.5 The tensile strength of the concrete is neglected in flexural calculations. 8.16.2.6 The concrete compressive stress/strain distribution may be assumed to be a rectangle, trapezoid, parabola, or any other shape that results in prediction of strength in substantial agreement with the results of comprehensive tests. 8.16.2.7 A compressive stress/strain distribution, which assumes a concrete stress of 0.85 f'c uniformly distributed over an equivalent compression zone bounded by the edges of the cross section and a line parallel to the neutral axis at a distance a =
1c
from the fiber of maximum
compressive strain, may be considered to satisfy the requirements of Article 8.16.2.6. The distance c from the fiber of maximum strain to the neutral axis The factor
1
shall be measured in a direction perpendicular to that axis. shall be taken as 0.85 for concrete strengths, f'c, up to and
including 4,000 psi. For strengths above 4,000 psi, fl shall be reduced continuously at a rate of 0.05 for each 1,000 psi of strength in 4,000 psi but
1
excess of
shall not be taken less than 0.65.
25
2.6.3 Design for Flexure
The AASHTO [5] Standard Specifications first presents the maximum reinforcement for flexural members. Article 8.16.3.1.1 states that the ratio of reinforcement provided shall not exceed 0.75 of the ratio
b
that would produce

b
balanced strain conditions for the section. The portion of
balanced by
compression reinforcement need not be reduced by the 0.75 factor. Article 8.16.3.1.2 states that balanced strain conditions exist at a cross section when the tension reinforcement reaches the strain corresponding to its specified yield strength, fy, just as the concrete in compression reaches its assumed ultimate strain of 0.003.
The AASHTO [5] Standard Specifications follow the traditional design approach for bending in reinforced concrete sections. Three cases are presented in the Specifications: rectangular sections with tension reinforcement only, flanged sections with tension reinforcement only, and rectangular sections with tension and compression reinforcement. The two cases for bending design are illustrated by Fig. 2.12, Fig. 2.13 respectively.
Figure 2.12. Rectangular Section with Tension Reinforcement Only.
26
Figure 2.13. Rectangular Section with Compression and Tension Reinforcement.
Article 8.16.3.2.1 gives the following equation for the design moment strength, Mn, for rectangular sections with tension reinforcement only:
f M n = As fy d 1 - 0.6
where,
= f As fy d a=
j z Bi y F k { BJN F
fy f 'c
(2-1)
As fy 0.85 f ' c b
(2.2)
The balanced reinforcement ratio, , is then given by Article 8.16.3.2.2 as:

rb =
0.85 b1 f 'c fy
B F
87, 000 87, 000 + fy
(2.3)
For instances when the compression flange thickness is less than a (depth of the compression block), the design moment strength may be computed by:
f M n = f As - Asf fy d - a 2 + Asf fy d - 0.5hf
where,
Asf =
a=
and the balanced steel ratio is:

rb=
A L L HL HH E HL HL i i i y y yF j k jz z z B{ { k{ j k
0.85f 'c b - bw hf fy
As - Asf fy 0.85 f ' cbw
(2-4)
(2-5) (2-6)
bw b
0.85 b1 f 'c fy
87, 000
87, 000 + fy
+rf
(2-7)
27
where,
rf=
Asf bw d
(2-8)
Article 8.16.3.4.1 gives the following equation for the design moment strength, Mn, for Rectangular sections with tension and compression
reinforcement as: If
then,
where,
i { i yiy y j j zjz z k { k{ k AL L H HH L E HL
As - A's bd
0.85 b1
f 'c d' fy
87, 000
87, 000 - fy
(2-9)
f M n = f As - A' s fy d - a 2 + A's fy d - d'
(2-10)
a=
As - A' s fy 0.85f ' cb
(2-11)
Article 8.16.3.4.2 states that when the value of (As - A's )/ bd is less than the value required by Eqn. 2-10, such that the stress in the compression reinforcement is less than the yield strength, fy, or when effects of compression reinforcement is less than the yield strength, fy, or when effects of compression reinforcement are neglected, the design moment strength may be computed by the equations in Article 8.16.3.2 (Eqns. 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3). Article 8.16.3.4.3 gives the balanced reinforcement ratio sections with compression reinforcement as follows:
rb=
b
for rectangular
where,
f ' s = 87, 000 1 -
i z zj z i F j { { k{ B y yi y k j k iz z j j{ { By y ki F k
0.85 b1f 'c fy 87, 000 87, 000 + fy
+ r'
f 's fy
(2-12)
d' d
87, 000 + fy 87, 000
fy
(2-13)
28
2.6.4
Design for Shear
Shear design in the Standard Specifications is accomplished by computing the contribution to the shear capacity from both the concrete and steel. The Standard Specifications provides the following equation for the design of cross sections subjected to shear:
Vu f Vn
(2-14)
where Vu is the factored shear force at the section considered and Vn is the nominal shear strength computed by:
Vn = Vc + Vs
(2-15)
where Vc is the nominal shear strength provided by the concrete in accordance with Article 8.16.6.2, and Vs is the nominal shear strength provided by the shear reinforcement in accordance with Article 8.16.6.3. Whenever applicable, effects of torsion shall be included. The shear strength provided by the concrete, for members subject to shear and flexure only, Vc shall be computed by:
Vc = 1.9 f 'c + 2, 500 r w Mu
or,
Vc = 2
i# y j# z k# { # # #
Vu d bw d f 'c bw d
(2-16)
(2-17)
where bw is the width of web and d is the distance from the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the longitudinal tension reinforcement. For tapered webs, bw shall be the average width or 1.2 times the minimum width, whichever is smaller. Additionally, the Standard Specifications provides the following two notes for the contribution of concrete shear resistance: (a) Vc shall not exceed 3 .5e f'cbwd when using more detailed calculations. (b) The quantity Vud /Mu shall not be greater than 1.0 where Mu is the factored moment occurring simultaneously with Vu at the section being considered. When the factored shear force, Vu exceeds shear strength Vc , shear reinforcement must be provided. The Standard Specifications provides for three cases of reinforcement. The first is when shear reinforcement is perpendicular to the axis of the member is used. The amount of reinforcement is then:
29
Av fy d s
Vs =
(2-18)
where Av is the area of shear reinforcement within a distance s.
When using inclined stirrups, the amount of required reinforcement is given by:
Vs = Av sina + cosa d s
HL
(2-19)
When a single vertical bar or a single group of vertical parallel bars located at the same distance from the support is used:
Vs = Av fy sina 3
# # #
f 'c bw d
(2-20)
The Standard Specifications also limit the amount of shear strength that the steel can provide. Article 8.16.6.3.9 states that shear strength Vs shall not be taken greater than:
Vs = 8
# # #
f 'c bw d
(2-21)
2.6.5 AASHTO LRFD Code Specifications for the Design of Reinforced Concrete Members using Strut-and-Tie Modeling
The AASHTO LRFD [12] Specifications states that strut-and-tie models may be used to determine internal force effects near supports and the points of application of concentrated loads at strength and extreme event limit states. Additionally, the strut-andtie model should be considered for the design of deep footings and pile caps or other situations in which the distance between the centers of applied load and the supporting reactions is less than twice the member thickness. Strut-and-tie modeling is covered by Articles 5.6.3.2 through 5.6.3.6. As previously mentioned, strut-and-tie modeling implicitly addresses the effects of both flexure and shear. Axial members in the truss model most explicitly satisfy force limitations as provided by the following generalized expression:
P r = f Pn
(2-22)
where: Pn = nominal resistance of strut or tie
30
= resistance factor for tension or compression specified in Article 5.5.4.2, as appropriate
2.6.5.1
Compression Struts
AASHTO LRFD [12] Specifications permit the use of either unreinforced or reinforced compression struts. AASHTO [5] gives the following equation for the nominal resistance of an unreinforced compressive strut:
Pn = fcu Acs
(2-23)
where: Pn = nominal resistance of a compressive strut fcu = limiting compressive stress as specified in Article 5.6.3.3.3 Acs = effective cross-sectional area of strut as specified in Article 5.6.3.3.2
AASHTO [5] provides the following equation for the condition where if the compressive strut contains reinforcement that is parallel to the strut and detailed to develop its yield stress in compression. For this reinforcing case, the nominal resistance of the strut shall be taken as:
Pn = fcu Acs + fy Ass
(2-24)
where: Ass = area of reinforcement in the strut Acs = effective cross-sectional area of strut as specified in Article 5.6.3.3.2 fcu = limiting compressive stress as specified in Article 5.6.3.3.3 fy = yield strength of steel
The cross sectional area of the compressive strut depends on the geometry of the reinforcing pattern. Figure 2.15 shows various reinforcing patterns, which affect the compressive struts area. AASHTO [5] states that the value of Acs shall be determined by considering both the available concrete area and the anchorage conditions at the ends of the strut, as shown in Fig. 2.15. When a strut is anchored by reinforcement, the effective concrete area may be considered to extend a
31
distance of up to six bar diameters from the anchored bar, as shown in Fig. 2.15(a). As stated previously, struts represent one dimensional stress fields,
which should not exceed the compressive strength of the concrete. AASHTO [5] provides the following for limiting compressive stress, fcu:
f 'c 0.8 + 170 1
fcu =
0.85 f 'c
(3-25)
where:
e1 = s + s +0.002 cot2 as
HL
(3-26)
and:
s
the smallest angle between the compressive strut and adjoining tension ties
the tensile strain in the concrete in the direction of the tension tie specified compressive strength (ksi)
f'c =
2.6.5.2
Tension Ties
AASHTO LRFD [12] Specifications state that tension tie reinforcement shall be anchored to the nodal zones by specified embedment lengths, hooks, or mechanical anchorages. The tension force shall be developed at the inner face of the nodal zone. The nominal resistance of a tension tie shall be taken as:
Pn = fy Ast + Aps fpc + fy
AE
(2-27)
where: Ast Aps fy fpe = total area of longitudinal mild steel reinforcement in the tie = area of prestressing steel = yield strength of mild steel longitudinal reinforcement = stress in prestressing steel due to prestress after losses
2.6.5.3 Nodal Zones
32
AASHTO LRFD Specifications state unless confining reinforcement is provided and its effect is supported by analysis or experimentation, the concrete compressive stress in the node regions of the strut shall not exceed: For node regions bounded by compressive struts and bearing areas: 0.85 fc For node regions anchoring a one-direction tension tie: 0.75 fc For node regions anchoring tension ties in more than one direction: 0.65 fc where: = the resistance factor for bearing on concrete as specified in Article 5.5.4.2.
In detailing the tension tie reinforcement, AASHTO LRFD [12] Specifications states that the tension tie reinforcement shall be uniformly distributed over an effective area of concrete at least equal to the tension tie force divided by the stress limits specified herein.
In addition to satisfying strength criteria for compression struts and tension ties, the nodal regions shall be designed to comply with the stress and anchorage limits specified in Articles 5.6.3.4.1 and 5.6.3.4.2. The bearing stress on the nodal region produced by concentrated loads or reaction forces shall satisfy the requirements specified in Article 5.7.5.
As with all reinforced concrete sections, crack control reinforcement should be provided. When employing the strut and tie model, structural members, not including slabs and footings, should contain a grid of reinforcing bars at each face of the member, typically referred to as skin steel. AASHTO LRFD [12] Specifications state that the spacing of the bars in the orthogonal grid shall not exceed 305 mm. Additionally, the code allows crack control reinforcing that is located within the tension tie to be considered as part of the tension tie reinforcing. The ratio of reinforcement area to gross area shall not be less than 0.003 in each direction.
33
Section x-x a. Strut anchored by
b. Strut anchored by bearing and reinforcement
a. Strut anchored by bearing and strut
Figure 2.1 Compressive Strut anchorage (AASHTO, 1998 [12])
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1
Introduction
This structure had been built base on the details drawing indicated in figure 3.1 (Reinforcing pattern provided by original design). The structure had been completed and put into service. This structure had been reported to had severe cracking on the top and side faces of the hammerhead piers.
The scope of this study is to highlight the application of a newer generation strut-and-tie model, which is not in practice at the time of the original design. A 3D strut-and-tie model is develope for the analysis of a Bridge Hammerhead system to explain the cause of cracking. The performance predict with the model, will simulating with the sequence of construction, and will be correlate with the field observations. The prediction help us explains the cause of cracking and concludes that phase construction is its main source.
In developing an approach to rehabilitating the crack structure, the stiffness of the analytical model needs to be properly select. For this reason, different levels of stiffness will be use to cover the lower and upper bounds for both possible crack and uncrack situations. A 3D finite-element solid modeling will also be conduct. A comparison will be make with the bending theory
behaviour of the structure under various Loading condition and contruction phases.
35
Figure 3.4 (Reinforcing pattern provide by original design)
The strut-and-tie method is being promoted by the AASHTO LRFD Specifications for the design of deep reinforced concrete sections. The lack of
36 familiarity with the procedure has caused most practicing engineers, to avoid implementation of LRFD [5] substructure design. This chapter presents a series of four design comparisons performed to illustrate the use of strut-and-tie modeling and to compare these designs with traditional sectional approaches.
The description of the proposed design procedure presents the process of defining loads and location of loads to produce the maximum moments on the cantilever of the hammerhead pier. The section for the creation of the truss model provides background information in truss modeling as well as the procedure used in the design studies for modeling the hammerhead piers internal truss. The final section in the design procedure is the dimensioning of the compressive struts, tension ties, and nodal zones. This section also discusses the placement of reinforcement for the shear and temperature effects.
The design studies provide examples of the strut-and-tie model applied to previously designed hammerhead piers using bending theory. This will allow for a comparison of the two designs and their accompanying reinforcing requirements. Finally, the results of the design studies will be discussed as well as the trends of industry to embrace the strut-and-tie model as a viable design option for deep sections.
3.2
Description of Design Procedures
3.2.1 The Structure Model
A three-dimensional hammerhead bridge piers model was developed for the analysis. The typical model used in the analysis as shown in figure 3.2 (3D structure model)
37
Figure 3.2 (3D structure model)
3.2.2 Load Generation Procedure
In this study, the self-weights of the bridge deck will apply to the nodes at the top of bearing pads, the top of the bridge hammerhead, and the top of the bridge pier, respectively, following the construction process.
The load calculations are summaries in Table 3.1 (Load case condition), and the location of the load applications are as shown in figure 3.3 (Load case condition).
38
Figure 3.3 (Load case condition).
The load to be considered in these pier design is the dead load reactions generated by the superstructure. Members contributing to the dead load reactions are the beam, intermediate diaphragms, deck, pier diaphragm, parapet, and future wearing surface.
For the design studies presented in this chapter, only maximum reaction on the bridge bearing pads was considered. The sequent of load placement is illustrated in figure 3.3. To simulate the phase construction, the application of loads to the model followed the sequence of construction.
The analysis of phases 1 loads, only the right portion of figure 3.3 that was contructed in phase 1 was modeled that is load P1.
39 The analysis of phase 2 loads, only the P1 and P3 that was constructed in phase 2 was modeled.
The analysis of phase 3 loads, only the P1, P2 and P3 that was constructed in phase 3 was modeled.
The analysis of phase 4 loads P1, P2, P3 and P4 that was constructed in phase 4 was modeled.
The phase 4 was considered, construction phase had completed and the structure are ready to be used.
Table 3.1 Load Case Definition Load Cases 1 2 3 4 Load Applied P1 P1 + P2 P1 + P2 + P3 P1 + P2 + P3 + P4 Source Of Load Reaction at support Reaction at support Reaction at support Reaction at support Structure Modeled Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4
When considering the load distribution to the beams, the maximum reaction should be placed so that to induce the maximum moment on the cantilever of the hammerhead pier. For the design study, the maximum moment is produced by placing the load P1, P2, P3 and P4. The total maximum load are assume to be the same for these study, these load is assume to be the maximum load produce at the end of each construction phase.
3.2.3 Analytical Method
The model will be analyse using 3D-Strut-and-tie Model. The predicted total reinforcement provided at top of the hammerhead can be determine from the result which will be tabulated for the respective load cases. The observation on
40 the result will be made, and this will explain what is the possible cause of the cracking of the bridge hammerhead stucture.
3.2.4 Truss Definition Procedure for Hammerhead Pier Caps
In beginning the modeling procedure it is first helpful to locate the nodal zones in the pier cap. The nodal zones are first defined where external loads, e.g. beam reactions, act on the pier cap. It should be noted that the compression struts and tension ties should intersect at the nodal zones and represent the location of the reinforcing pattern.
3.2.5 Pier Design Procedure
The solution for the truss forces can be accomplished by using a software program or by performing manual calculations. The truss solution will also aid in defining the members that are in tension and compression for complex truss systems. The dimensioning of the compression strut, tension tie, and nodal zones are governed by Articles 5.6.3.2 through 5.6.3.6 of the AASHTO LRFD [12] Specifications and were previously discussed in Section 2.6. The typical 3-D Strut-and-Tie Model used in these analysis as shown in figure 3.4 (3D strut and tie model)
41
Figure 3.4 (3D strut and tie model)
42 3.3 Typical Bridge Hammerhead Pier Analysis / Design
3.3.1
Project Description
The structure is comprised of multiple span, and the spans range from 40 meter to 45 meter. The superstructure consists of Hammerhead Pier and Box girder deck. The deck are sitted on double row of bridge bearing. The piers have an overall height rangging from 3.5m to 10.0m are positioned on pilecap foundation that are keyed into bedrock. This structure had been built base on the details drawing indicated in figure 3.1 (Reinforcing pattern provided by original design). The structure had been completed and put into service. This structure had been reported to had severe cracking on the top and side faces of hammerhead. the
3.3.2 Original Analysis/Design
The original design was conducted using bending theory and the output result yield the reinforcing pattern as shown in Figure 3.1 (Reinforcing pattern provided by the original design). The original analysis yielded hundred of fouthy number 40mm diameter bars for the tension reinforcing in the pier cap. Furthermore, the original design also specified double number-five shear stirrups spaced at 150mm centres. The final design of the pier is shown in Figure 3.1.
3.3.3
Strut-and-Tie Analysis/Design
The strut-and-tie analysis and the pier design were carried out using the procedure previously defined in this chapter. After performing several iterations a truss model, illustrated by figure 3.4 (3D strut and tie model). This truss was considered and had produced optimum result for the hammerhead piers analysis. The actual bridge loading analysis was not carried out. The load considered to be acting on the pier are obtain from the calculation which had been carried out previous designer. The maximum load on the bearing was considered in these
43 analysis, and this load were assume to the the maximum load act on the bridge bearing for each construction phase as shown in table 3.2 (Tabulated estimated load). Figure 3.5 (2D strut and tie model) show 2D view of the structure model.
Load Cases 1 2 3 4
Load Applied
Esimated Load (kN)
Structure Modeled
P1 P1 + P3 P1 + P3 + P2 P1 + P3 + P2 + P4
7000 7000 + 7000 7000 + 7000 +7000 7000 + 7000 + 7000 + 7000
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4
Table 3.2 (Tabulated Estimated Load )
Figure 3.5 (2D strut and tie model)
44 3.3.4 Strut-and-Tie Analysis/Design For Phase 1
The load being applied only to node 2 and 3 of the model and is considered the completion of Phase 1 construction. The structure model is as shown on figure 3.6 (Proposed Load Application for Phase 1). The analytical result is shown figure 3.7 (Result of Forces in Member) and figure 3.8 (Result of Deflected shape in Member)
Figure 3.6 (Proposed Load Application for Phase 1).
45
Figure 3.7 (Result of Forces in Member).
46
Figure 3.8 (Result member deflected shape).
The truss analysis was performed using the software program STRAP version 11 and checked by manual calculations. An Excel spreadsheet was used for the sizing the reinforcement for the tension ties and calculation of the required compression area. The spreadsheet is presented in Table 3.3 (Tabulated Member Forces For Each Construction Face) . The typical calculation procedure are shown in section 3.4
The load being applied only to node 2, 3, 7 and 8 of the model and is considered the completion of Phase 1 construction. The structure model is as shown on figure 3.10 (Proposed Load Application for Phase 2). The analytical result is shown figure 3.11 (Result of Forces in Member) and figure 3.12 (Result of Deflected shape in Member)
48
49
The load being applied only to node 11 and 12 of the model and is considered the completion of Phase 1 construction. The structure model is as shown on figure 3.12 (Proposed Load Application for Phase 3). The analytical result is shown figure 4.13 (Result of Forces in Member) and figure 3.14 (Result of Deflected shape in Member)
51
52
The load being applied only to node 2, 3, 7, 8, 28, 27, 25 and 26 of the model and is considered the completion of Phase 1 construction. The structure model is as shown on figure 3.15 (Proposed Load Application for Phase 1). The analytical result is shown figure 3.16 (Result of Forces in Member) and figure 3.17 (Result of Deflected shape in Member)
54
55
56 Table 3.3 Tabulated Member Forces For Each Construction Phases
Member Node Number
Phase 1 Member Force (kN)
Maximum Force In member at each Section of pier
Top longitudinal member 1-2 19-20 2-3 20-21 3-4 21-22 4-5 22-23 5-6 23-24 6-7 24-25 7-8 25-26 8-9 26-27 -31.1 -46.7 -13111 -130 -29388 -233 -14050 -37.7 -14050 -37.5 -177 -137 -84 -91.6 -71 -67.7 -39.9 -20.9 -13195 -38.6 -29565 -85.8 -28160 -74.5 -28180 -74.6 -29565 -85.7 -13195 -36.6 -39.9 -20.9 -88.8 -54.2 -13307 -13168 -29835 -29428 -28131 -14121 -28131 -14121 -29386 -304 -13114 -112 -30.5 -52.9 -18.3 -19.7 -13226 -13242 -29565 -29646 -28163 -28167 -28163 -28167 -29655 -29646 -13226 -13242 -18.3 -19.7 -88.8 -54.2 -13307 -13242 -29835 -29464 -28163 -28167 -28163 -28167 -29655 -29646 -13226 -13242 -71 -67.6
57 Member Node Number Phase 1 Member Force (kN) Phase 2 Member Force (kN) Phase 3 Member Force (kN) Phase 4 Member Force (kN) Maximum Force In member at each Section of pier
Bottom longitudinal member 10-11 28-29 11-12 29-30 12-13 30-31 13-14 31-32 14-15 32-33 15-16 33-34 16-17 34-35 17-18 35-36 +6.9 +9.7 +31.5 +43.7 +133.23 +128 +19321 +158 -8875 -208 +76.8 +91.1 +72.6 +66.8 +5.5 +7 +1.4 +2.6 +41 +23 +134 +37.1 +10446 +49.5 +10446 -49.5 +41 +37.1 +41 +1.4 +1.4 +2.6 +5.8 +6.5 +87.9 +55.7 +13511 +13380 +10638 +22.7 +10207 +8892 +29.2 +103 +29.2 +6 +10.5 +10.5 +1.2 +1.3 +17.7 +19 +13430 +13446 +10394 +10394 +10389 +10394 +17.7 +13446 +17.7 +1.2 +1.3 +1.3 +6.9 +9.7 +87.9 +55.7 +13511 +13446 +19321 +10394 +10446 +10394 +76.8 +13446 +72.6 +66.8 +10.5 +10.5
Tranverse member at Node 1 1-10 side 10-28 bottom 28-19 side 19-1 top +38.1 +29.9 +11.7 +39.2 +33 +32.9 +39.2 +33 -84.9 +32.1 +4.8 +4.8 +3.8 -25 +6.7 -0.21 +7.5 +0.67 -0.24 +32.1 +32.9 +39.2 +39.2 -84.9
1-28 diagonal -65.7
58 Member Node Number Phase 1 Member Force (kN) Phase 2 Member Force (kN) Phase 3 Member Force (kN) Phase 4 Member Force (kN) Maximum Force In member at each Section of pier
Tranverse member at Node 2 2-11 side 11-29 bottom 29-20 side 20-2 top 2-29 diagonal -8 -41.1 -91 -44.5 +112 -43.7 -38.7 -52.6 -38.7 +111 -65.4 -6.5 -5.3 -5.9 +26.2 -16.3 -2.7 -22.5 -3.7 +8.1 -65.4 -41.1 -91 -44.5 +112
Tranverse member at Node 3 3-12 side 12-30 bottom 30-21 side 21-3 top 3-30 diagonal -7363 -15.5 -95.2 -16.2 +57 -7423 -3.5 -48.1 -4.1 +15.3 -7460 -38.9 -7297 -43.5 +143 -7454 -5.8 -7445 -7.2 +22.5 -7460 -38.9 -7445 -43.5 +143
Tranverse member at Node 4 4-13 side 13-31 bottom 31-22 side 22-4 top 4-31 diagonal +2658.1 +31,3 +30.1 -11.5 +2600 +13.1 +6.7 -28.6 +2707 +2642.2 +82.5 +316 +2566 +2593 +14.1 +58.2 +2642.2 +82.5 +316 +2707
Tranverse member at Node 5 5-14 side 14-32 bottom 32-23 side 23-5 top 5-32 diagonal -16 -2 +3.2 -14.1 -32 -4.1 +6.3 -28.2 -7.5 -32.4 +13.1 -58 -17.1 -60.6 +19.8 -87.1 -60.6 +19.8 -87.1 -32
Tranverse member at Node 6 6-15 side 15-33 bottom +22981 +2600 +2459 +2565 +22981
59 33-24 side 24-6 top 6-33 diagonal +300 +23.4 +86.4 +484.6 +6.7 -28.5 +23816 +75.1 -286 +2593 +14.1 +58.2 +23816 +75.1 -286
Tranverse member at Node 7 7-16 side 16-34 bottom 34-25 side 25-7 top 7-34 diagonal -60.3 +12.2 +47.1 +12 -41.7 -7423 -3.4 -48.1 -4.1 +15 -7416 -37.4 -195 -40.4 +136 -7454 +5.8 -7445 +7.2 -22.5 -7454 -37.4 -7445 -40.4 +136
Tranverse member at Node 8 8-17 side -36 +3.2 +38.3 -5.8 -1.4 -43.7 -38.7 -52.6 -38.7 +111 +6.3 -35.1 -69.9 -36.6 +92.9 -16.3 -2.7 -22.6 -3.7 +8.1 -43.7 -38.7 -69.9 -38.7 +111
17-35 bottom 35-26 side 26-8 top
8-35 diagonal
Tranverse member at Node 9 9-18 side 18-36 bottom 36-27 side 27-9 top 9-36 diagonal -30.4 +3.1 +51 +0.16 -19.2 +7.6 +32.9 +39.2 +33 +60.8 +33 +27.9 +27.9 +29.9 -59.7 -6.7 +0.22 -0.22 +0.67 +0.24 -30.4 +32.9 +51 +33 -59.7
60 Member Node Number Phase 1 Member Force (kN) Inclined member 1-11 19-29 2-21 20-30 3-13 21-31 4-14 22-32 6-14 24-32 7-15 25-33 8-16 26-34 9-17 27-35 +47.3 +1.1 +16358 +104 +23612 +135 -3054.6 -370 +27629 +348 +135 -66.5 +16.2 -29.8 +19.2 +103 +60.8 +31.8 +16374 +74.1 +23747 +68.4 -2917 -22.2 +2917 +22.2 +23747 +68.4 +16374 +74.1 +84.9 +31.8 +5.9 +82.4 +16425 +16458 +23975 +23587 -3392 -3045 +2499 +2752 +23605 +278 +16361 +74.1 +45.6 +80.5 +27.9 +29.9 +16434 +16458 +23833 +23797 -2973 -2974 +2973 +2946 +23833 +23796 +16439 +16458 +27.5 +29.9 +60.8 +82.4 +16434 +16458 +23975 +23797 -3392 -3045 +27629 +2752 +23833 +23796 +16439 +16458 +84.9 +103 Phase 2 Member Force (kN) Phase 3 Member Force (kN) Phase 4 Member Force (kN) Maximum Force In member at each Section of pier
61
Figure 3.18 Maximum Members Force
62 3.4 Typical Bridge Hammerhead Pier Design Example
3.4.1 Design Example 1
3.4.1.1 Steel Reinforcement for Main Tension ties
a.
Reinforcement longitudinal tension ties Considered member node 2 to node 3 [Phase 3 Construction]
Required area of reinforcement for ties
= Ntie / ( fy) = 13307x 103 / (0.7 x 460)
Asreq = 41326 mm2 Selected bar size Y = 40 dia. = 41326 / ( x 402/4) = 52 numbers According the AASHTO LRFD, the minimum reinforcement for horizontal tie is Asmin = 0.03 (fc / fy) bh = 0.03 (30 / 460 ) 2000 x 2750 = 10760 mm2 < Asreq OK
Number of steel reinforcement required
b.
Reinforcement tranverse tension ties Considered member node 20 to node 29 [Phase 1 Construction]
= Ntie / ( fy) = 91 x 103 / (0.7 x 460) = 282 mm2
Selected bar size
= 25 dia. = 282 / ( x 252/4) = 1 numbers
Hence Provide 5 T 25 two-legged
63 stirrup @ 100 = 2 nos @ 0.9m width
52 T 40 2 T 25
3.4.1.2 Calculation For The Inclined Strut
a.
Check Of Strut
Considered member node 2 to node 12
The struts will be checked by computing the strut widths and checked wether they will fit in the space available. By neglecting the tensioning effects, the average tensile strain in tie BC can be estimated as
s
= Ntie(loop) / (Av(tie) x Es) = 91.0 x 103 / (282 x 200000) = 0.002 < fy / Es = 460/200000 = 0.002 = 0.002 + (0.002 + 0.002) cot2 (370) = 0.011
The grade of concrete use was grade 40 N/mm and the effective strength of the concrete in the strut is obtained from in AASHTO (Eq. 3.25) as fcu = fc/(0.8 + 170
1)
< 0.85fc
= 40 / (0.8 + 170 x 0.011)
64 = 14.98 N/mm2 Required width of strut node 2 to node 12 = Nstrut 2-12 /( fcu b) = 16434 x 103 / (14.98 x 2000) = 549 mm Taking the length of strut as 2000mm that is half the pier width
dc=549mm
b. Check of Node N1
This node is a CCT type. Its geometry is prescribe by the line of action of the vertical load of 7000 kN, by the angle of the strut ( = 37o), and by the location of the longitudinal steel reinforcement. In figure 3.7, the node is
bounded by lines AB, BC and CA. The line BC is twice the depth of the resultant force T, i.e Lh = 2 x 200 = 400mm and the other length are AC = BC / Cos = 400/ Cos 37o = 400 / 0.799 = 500 mm Which is the minimum size of the bearing plate under load.
65
AC=500mm
3.4.1.3 Secondary reinforcement
a. Reinforcement tranverse to main struts (Pier Web Face node 2 to node 3)
The main inclined strut with compressive force C, required tranverse reinforcement because the stress fields will splay outwards, as indicated in figure 3.8 (Tranverse tension in strut between nodes). To take account of the tensile forces induced, and to provide skin reinforcement to control surface cracking on the sides of the cross head, a grid of reinforcing steel steel is used, which consists of vertical and horizontal bars. Typical calculation:Selected Reinforcement Vertical Reinforcement Selected Reinforcement Horizontal Reinforcement Tensile force per bar = Y25 = Y25 = fy x 252/4 x 460
= 0.5x
= 112 kN A Square grid spacing chosen (subject to checking) The inclined angle = 150 mm = 370
66 Check For Vertical Member Horizontal length of strut Number of vertical bar cutting the inclined strut in each face = 2 x (3500 / 150) = 2 x 23 nos. The width of strut Total resultant force, tranverse to the strut = 3327 mm = 2 x 23 x 112 x cos 37 = 4114 kN Check For Horizontal Member Vertical length of strut Number of horizontal bar cutting the inclined strut in each face = 2 x (1950 / 150) = 2 x 13 nos. The length of strut Total resultant force, tranverse to the strut = 2000mm = 2x13 x 112 x cos 37 = 2326 kN The total tranverse force is thus = 4114 + 2326 = 6436 kN A simple check is made to ensure that this is adequate for the inclined strut between nodes N1 and N2. From the analysis the force in strut member The tranverse tensile forcees T = 16434 kN = 0.5 x 16434 sin 30 = 4109 kN The total force required is = 2xT = 2 x 4109 = 8218 kN Since total tranverse force less than the force required, therefore either the grid spacing must be reduced or the bar size increased. Let reduced the grid spacing, The required grid spacing = 150 x 8218 / 6436 = 191 mm At the top of the cross heads the vertical bars are bent over to provide tranverse reinforcement over the full length. = 1950 mm = 3500mm
67
Figure 3.19 (Tranverse tension in strut between nodes N1 and N2)
T 25 - 175 2 T 25
T 25 - 175
68 3.4.2 Design Example 2
a.
= Ntie / ( fy) = 13307x 103 / (0.7 x 460)
b.
= Ntie / ( fy) = 7460 x 103 / (0.7 x 460) = 23140 mm2
Selected bar size
= 25 dia. = 23140 / ( x 252/4) = 48 numbers
Hence Provide 5 T 25 two-legged stirrup @ 100 = 10 nos @ 0.9m width
69
75 T 40 48 T 25 or 5 T 25 Two legged stirrup @ 75 c/c
a.
Check Of Strut
s
= Ntie(loop) / (Av(tie) x Es) = 7460 x 103 / (23140 x 200000) = 0.002 < fy / Es = 460 / 200000 = 0.002 = 0.002 + (0.002 + 0.002) cot2 (460) = 0.006
1)
< 0.85fc
= 40 / (0.8 + 170 x 0.006) = 21.68 N/mm2
Required width of strut node 3 to node 13
= Nstrut 3-13 /( fcu b)
70 = 23975 x 103 / (21.68 x 2000) = 542 mm Taking the length of strut as 2000mm that is half the pier width
dc=542mm
b. Check of Node N1
This node is a CCT type. Its geometry is prescribe by the line of action of the vertical load of 7000 kN, by the angle of the strut ( = 46o), and by the location of the longitudinal steel reinforcement. In figure 3.7, the node is
bounded by lines AB, BC and CA. The line BC is twice the depth of the resultant force T, i.e Lh = 2 x 200 = 400mm and the other length are AC = BC / Cos = 400/ Cos 46o = 400 / 0.695 = 576 mm Which is the minimum size of the bearing plate under load.
71
AC=576mm
= 0.5x
72 Check For Vertical Member Horizontal length of strut Number of vertical bar cutting the inclined strut in each face = 2 x (4000 / 150) = 2 x 27 nos. The width of strut Total resultant force, tranverse to the strut = 3327 mm = 2 x 27 x 112 x cos 46 = 14704 kN Check For Horizontal Member Vertical length of strut Number of horizontal bar cutting the inclined strut in each face = 2 x (2594 / 150) = 2 x 18 nos. The length of strut Total resultant force, tranverse to the strut = 2000mm = 2 x 18 x 112 x cos 46 = 2800 kN The total tranverse force is thus = 14704 + 2800 = 17504 kN A simple check is made to ensure that this is adequate for the inclined strut between nodes N1 and N2. From the analysis the force in strut member The tranverse tensile forcees (Refer figure 3.19) The total force required is T = 23833 kN = 0.5 x 23833 sin 30 = 10319 kN = 2xT = 2 x 10319 = 20638 kN Since total tranverse force less than the force required, therefore either the grid spacing must be reduced or the bar size increased. Let reduced the grid spacing, The required grid spacing = 150 x 17504 / 20638 = 125 mm At the top of the cross heads the vertical bars are bent over to provide tranverse reinforcement over the full length. = 2594 mm = 4000mm
73
T 25 - 125 T 25 - 125 48 T 25 or 5 T 25 Two legged strirrup @ 75 c/c
74 3.4.3 Design Example 3
a.
= Ntie / ( fy) = 28167x 103 / (0.7 x 460)
b.
= Ntie / ( fy) = 2707 x 103 / (0.7 x 460) = 8407 mm2
Selected bar size
= 25 dia. = 8407 / ( x 252/4) = 18 numbers
Hence Provide 5 T 25 two-legged stirrup @ 100 = 5 nos @ 0.9m width
75
70 T 40 18 T 25 or 5 T 25 Two legged stirrup @ 100 c/c
a.
Check Of Strut
s
= Ntie(loop) / (Av(tie) x Es) = 3329 x 103 / (8407 x 200000) = 0.002 < fy / Es = 460 / 200000 = 0.002 = 0.002 + (0.002 + 0.002) cot2 (600) = 0.024
1)
< 0.85fc
= 40 / (0.8 + 170 x 0.024) = 8.197 N/mm2
76 Required width of strut node 4 to node 14 = Nstrut 4-14 /( fcu b) = 3329 x 103 / (8.197 x 2000) = 204 mm Taking the length of strut as 2000mm that is half the pier width
dc=204mm
b. Check of Node N1
This node is a CCT type. Its geometry is prescribe by the line of action of the vertical load of 0 kN, by the angle of the strut ( = 60o), and by the location of the longitudinal steel reinforcement. In figure 3.7, the node is bounded by lines AB, BC and CA. The line BC is twice the depth of the resultant force T, i.e Lh = 2 x 200 = 400mm and the other length are AC = BC / Cos = 400/ Cos 60o = 400 / 0.952 = 421 mm Which is the minimum size of the bearing plate under load.
77
AC=421mm
= 0.5x
78 Check For Vertical Member Horizontal length of strut Number of vertical bar cutting the inclined strut in each face = 2 x (4000 / 150) = 2 x 27 nos. The width of strut Total resultant force, tranverse to the strut = 3327 mm = 2 x 27 x 112 x cos 60 = 5760 kN Check For Horizontal Member Vertical length of strut Number of horizontal bar cutting the inclined strut in each face = 2 x (2594 / 150) = 2 x 18 nos. The length of strut Total resultant force, tranverse to the strut = 2000mm = 2 x 18 x 112 x cos 60 = 3840 kN The total tranverse force is thus = 5760 + 3840 = 9000 kN A simple check is made to ensure that this is adequate for the inclined strut between nodes N1 and N2. From the analysis the force in strut member The tranverse tensile forcees (Refer figure 3.19) The total force required is T = 3392 kN = 0.5 x 3392 sin 30 = 1675 kN = 2xT = 2 x 1675 = 3352 kN Since total tranverse force less than the force required, therefore either the grid spacing must be reduced or the bar size increased. Let reduced the grid spacing, The required grid spacing = 150 x 9000 / 3352 = 400 mm At the top of the cross heads the vertical bars are bent over to provide tranverse reinforcement over the full length. = 2594 mm = 4000mm
79
T 25 - 125 T 25 - 125 18 T 25 or 5 T 25 Two legged strirrup @ 150 c/c
80
Figure 3.20 (Reinforcing pattern analysed using strut-and-tie model)
CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS OF RESULT
4.1
Introduction
The design study presents a procedure for developing the strut-and-tie model for hammerhead pier caps. The design procedure addresses the placement of the loads so as to induce the maximum moment in the cantilever section of the hammerhead pier. The design procedure also demonstrates the process for defining the tension ties, compression struts, and nodal zones.
4.2
Analysis of Result
Load cases examined in this study are summarised in Table 3.3. For convinience of discussion, the numbering definitions of members are shown in figure 3.8, only a partial model is shown for clarity. The predicted forces of selected members are summarised in Table 3.3 in column number 6. The members forces of all four models earlier were examined under all the load cases to predict the lower and upper bounds of forces. A few observation were made as folows.
82 4.2.1 Possibility of Cracking
According to the constrution drawings Figure 3.1 (Reinforcing pattern provide by original design) , the reinforcement povided at the top of the piers was 140 number T 40, the predicted total tension force at the top of the bridge pier constructed at Phase 3 gives a total tensile force of 29835 Kn which required reinforcement 150 number T 40. This observation indicates an underdesign of reinforcement and explained the tranverse cracking at the top of the pier. Along the web pier component of strut member node 3 to node 13 (diagonal strut), the total compressived force 23975 kN from calculation this section requires anticrack T 25 at spacing 125 centres bothways. According to the construction drawing the reinforcement provide T 25 at spacing 125 centres bothway throught the web. According to the analysis using the strut-and-ties model at node 3 required more reinforcement due to the tension effect of member node 3 to node 12, which constructed at Phase 3, gives a total tensile force of 7460 kN and required 48 number T 25 reinforcement Figure 3.20 (Reinforcing pattern analysed using strut-and-tie model).
According to the construction drawing where the model was analysed using bending theory, the reinforcement provided was 5 x 2 that were 10 number of reinforcement within the width of node, which are provided interm of two legged stirrup at 150 mm centres which is equivalent to 5 number of reinforcement each row, if consider only half of the beam width. This
observation indicates an underdesign of reinforcement under the bearing pad and explained the tranverse cracking at web of pier.
5.1.2
Phased Construction
The two observation were made from Table 3.3, First for model Phase 1 and model Phase 3, the tie forces of member node 3 to node 4 built in Phase 3 are signnificantly larger than those of their counterparts, member node 21 to node 22, member node 6 to node 7, member node 25 to node 26. This explains why the cracking of the pier built in Phase 3 is more severe than the other Phase of
83 constructions. Second for typical Phase 1 construction tie member node 13 to node 14, tie member node 30 to node 31, which assume nonphased construction predicted more compressive forces than does the corresponding load in Phase 2, Phase 3 and Phase 4 construction. This indicated that phased construction is more critical for cracking than nonphased construction and the phased constuction is the main cause of the severe cracking of the bridge piers.
The study showed a 3D strut-and-tie model, reliable visualisation of the paths of force flows. In strut-and-tie model the force distribution is visualised as compressive and tensile force flows that are modeled as compressive strut and tensile ties, respectively and this was very usefull in Phases construction.
4.3
Discussion of Results
The strut-and-tie model is a useful model for concrete beam failing in shear with web reinforcement. The strut-and-tie model illustrates the powerfull truss concept for reinforced concrete structure in which the compressive stresses are resisted by the concrete struts and the tensile stresses by the reinforcing ties.
The four cases showed above demostrate that whenever common practice was used for designing D-regions, the practice leads to deficiencies or inefficiencies in the design of these commonly occuring and often critical parts of structures. Due to the inadequacies in common practice, couple with the unlimited variety of D-Region shapes and loading conditions, it is not surprising that most structural problem occur in D-Regions.
These case studies showed, the strut-and-tie model required more flexural steel than the traditional design procedures. As could be seen in figure 3.1 (Reinforcing pattern provide by original design) and the figure 3.20 (Reinforcing pattern analysed using strut-and-tie model).
CHAPTER 5
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1
Introduction
This chapter will address the differences in flexural and shear steel required by the application of various load condition. Additionally, this chapter presents a concise procedure for the consistent design of hammerhead piers which addresses load generation, truss model definition, truss element dimensioning, and shear design.
5.2 Recommended Strut-and-Tie Design Procedure For Hammerhead Piers
5.2.1 Determination of Loads
The external loads acting on the pier at the nodal zone locations are the superstructure dead load and live load reactions. Members contributing to the dead load reactions are the beam, intermediate diaphragms, deck, pier diaphragm, parapet, and future wearing surface. The dead load reactions should be calculated for the interior and exterior beams separately due to the difference in effective slab widths.
5.2.2 Defining the Truss Model
Strut-and-tie models are particularly suitable for designing the disturbed regions (D-regions) of a concrete structure where the strain distribution is
85 significantly nonlinear, such as at point loads, corbels, deep beams, and openings. Standard truss models as a special form of STMs or sectional methods can be used to design the B-regions of a concrete structure where the Bernoulli hypothesis of plane strain distribution is assumed valid. Strut-and-tie modeling has been proved to be a rational, unified, and safe approach for the design and detailing of structural concrete that includes reinforced and prestressed concrete structures under combined load effects.The first step in defining the truss is locating the nodal zones. The nodal zones are defined where external loads, e.g. beam reactions, act on the pier cap and where the stress is transferred from the cap to the column. The location of the stress path can be assumed to be located where the reinforcing pattern transfers load from the cap to the column.
The tension ties should be modeled at the predicted location of the tension reinforcement while the compression struts represent the primary compressive stress and should be defined accordingly. Both the tension ties and compression struts should begin and terminate at the nodal zones. The final truss model should be represented by an acceptable truss model and have the least number of tensile ties possible.
The geometry of the tension tie is determined by the location of the tensile reinforcing pattern; therefore, care should be taken to insure that the final reinforcing pattern represents the tensile tie location in the truss model. For example, if the flexural reinforcing is assumed to be located three inches from the face of the concrete, then the tension tie should be modeled at a depth of three inches. If the location of flexural steel exceeds the three-inch depth, then the model should be resized based on the new centroid of the reinforcing mat.
The diameter of reinforcing bars used also dictates the depth of the reinforcing centroid. Smaller reinforcing bars will normally produce a deeper centroid due an increase in the layers required to accommodate the number of bars, while the opposite occurs for larger diameter bars. However, care should be taken when
86 specifying the larger diameter bars due to violating flexural steel distribution to control cracking.
5.2.3 Dimensioning of Tensile Ties, Compressive Struts, and Nodal Zones
The American Concrete Institute (ACI) introduces the Strut-and-Tie Method as a design method for D-Region problems in the 2002 edition of ACI 318 Code. The provisions consist of five sections these provisions are summarized as follows:
1.
Rules in Selecting Strut-and-Tie Models
In designing using the Strut-and-Tie Method, a Strut-and-Tie Model representing idealized load-transfer mechanism in the D-Region under consideration is to be selected (A.2.1). The selected Strut-and-Tie Model should consists of Struts, Ties, and Nodes (A.2.1) and has to be in equilibrium with the forces acting on the D-Region (A.2.2). The finite dimensions of Strut-and-Tie Model components, representing the stress fields of Struts, Ties, and Nodes, should be considered (A.2.3). Tie stress fields can cross Strut stress fields (A.2.4). To avoid severe strain incompatibility between Struts and Ties, the angle between a Strut and a Tie framing into a Node cannot be smaller than 25 degrees (A.2.5).
2.
Strength Requirements
The Strut-and-Tie Model components must have sufficient capacity to resist the force demand such that (A.2.6) Fn where: Fu
strength reduction factor,
87 Fn = Fu = nominal strength of Strut, Tie, or Node, and factored force demand of the Strut, Tie, or Node.
a.
Strut Strength (ACI A.3)
The nominal strength of a Strut, Fns , is defined as Fns = fcu Ac where:
fcu = Ac =
effective compressive strength and cross sectional area at the end of Strut.
The effective compresive strength, fcu , is defined as fcu = 0.85 where:

s
fc
s s s
= 1.00 for prismatic Struts in uncracked compression zones, = 0.04 for Struts in tension members, = 0.75 if Struts may be bottle shaped and crack control is included, = 0.60 if Struts may be bottle shaped and crack control is not included, and = 0.60 for all other cases.
reinforcement
s
reinforcement
s
The crack control reinforcement requirement is
vi
sin
0.003, where
vi
is
the steel ratio of the i-th layer of reinforcement crossing the Strut, and is the angle between the axis of the Strut and the bars.
b.
Tie Strength (ACI A.4)
The nominal strength of a non-prestressed reinforcement Tie, Fnt , is defined as Fnt = As fy
88 where: As = fy = area of steel reinforcement and yield strength of steel reinforcement.
c.
Node Strength (ACI A.5)
The nominal strength of a Nodal Zone, Fnn, is defined as Fnn = fcu An where: fcu = An = effective compressive strength and area of a Nodal Zone face in which the force is framing, measured perpendicular to the direction of the force.
The effective compresive strength, fcu, is defined as fcu = 0.85 where:

n n n n
fc,
= 1.00 if Nodes are bounded by Struts and/or bearing areas, = 0.80 if Nodes anchor only one Tie, and = 0.60 if Nodes anchor more than one Tie.
3.
Anchorage Requirements (ACI A.4.3)
The Tie reinforcement must be properly anchored in the Nodal Regions at the ends of the Tie such that the corresponding Tie force can be developed at the point where the centroid of the reinforcement in the Tie leaves the Extended Nodal Zone. An extended Nodal Zone is a region bounded by the intersection of the Effective Strut Width and the Effective Tie Width.
CHAPTER 6
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
6.1 Summary
The idea of the strut-and-tie method came from the truss analogy method introduced independently by Ritter and Mrch in the early 1900s for shear design of B-Regions. This method employs the so-called truss model as its design basis. The model was used to idealize the flow of force in a cracked concrete beam. In parallel with the increasing availability of experimental results and the development of limit analysis in plasticity theory, the truss analogy method has been validated and improved considerably in the form of full member or sectional design procedures. The truss model has also been used as the design basis for torsion.
The design study presents a procedure for developing the strut-and-tie model for hammerhead pier caps. The design procedure addresses the placement of the loads so as to induce the maximum moment in the cantilever section of the hammerhead pier. The design procedure also demonstrates the process for defining the tension ties, compression struts, and nodal zones. In summary, the following steps are used for the design of hammerhead pier caps by the strut-andtie method. Determine the reactions of the superstructure based on the governing load combination. Define all nodal zones at the beam reactions and the cap to column reinforcing locations.
90 Define the tension ties and compression struts from each nodal zone and at depths equal to the approximate location of the reinforcing pattern. Check truss continuity at each nodal zone. Solve truss internal forces for tension ties and compression struts. Determine reinforcing requirements for tension ties and check compressive strut regions. Check stress of nodal zones. Revise truss as required. Provide shear stirrups and distributed steel for the hammerhead pier cap.
The design study compares the reinforcing requirements of the original design with the results obtained in the strut-and-tie modeling method. Based on the results of the design study and the procedure used in the modeling, recommendations are proposed for employing the strut-and-tie model to hammerhead piers. The recommendations include the revising of the truss model geometry, treatment of reinforcing bars and crack control, the repeating of truss model geometry and the use of shear stirrups.
6.2 Conclusions
Strut-and-Tie Model is a useful tool for structural engineers. As current practice is more and more relaying on computer, this will made the designer slowly forgetting first principle and more and more is guided by codes of difference standards. Strut- and-Tie Model is providing a way in engineering visualization, allowing consistent design. It is creating opportunities, to modify finite element programs to come up with load path and Strut-and-Tie model, and investigate alternative solution.
91 While Strut-and-Tie is more or less readily available for reinforce concrete structure, in case of prestress concrete there is a need for further developements. However at present stage anchorage zones can be modelled on an easy way.
As a statically admissible stress field, a strut-and-tie model has to be in equilibrium externally with the applied loading and reactions (the boundary forces) and internally at each Node. In addition, reinforcing or prestressing steel is selected to serve as the ties, the effective width of each strut is selected, and the shape of each nodal zone is constructed such that the strength is sufficient. Therefore, only equilibrium and yield criterion need to be fulfilled for an admissible strut-and-tie model.
As a result of these relaxed requirements, there is no unique strut-and-tie model for a given problem. In other words, more than one admissible strut-and-tie model may be developed for each load case as long as the selected truss is in equilibrium with the boundary forces and the stresses in the struts, ties, and nodes are within the acceptable limits.
The AASHTO LRFD [12] Design Code states in Section 5.6.3.1 The strut-and-tie model should be considered for the design of deep footings and pile caps or other situations in which the distance between the centers of applied load and the supporting reactions is less than about twice the member thickness. The commentary further elaborates on the use of strut-and-tie models by pointing out the shortcomings of traditional design theory. Traditional design theory assumes that the shear distribution remains uniform and that the longitudinal strains will vary linearly over the depth of the beam. Furthermore, traditional design theory does not account for shear, moment, and torsional interaction, which the strutand-tie model does take into account (AASHTO, 1998 [5]).
The AASHTO LRFD [5] Specifications promote the strut-and-tie method as the design method of choice for deep reinforced concrete sections. However,
92 no one has undertaken the task of developing a consistent approach to the design of hammerhead pier caps employing the strut-and-tie modeling method.
The specific objectives of the study are to compare the reinforcing requirements of the strength design method AASHTO LRFD [12] for flexure and shear design with the strut-and-tie modeling method and to develop a procedure for modeling a hammerhead pier cap that can be applied by practicing engineers. This work presents a clear and concise procedure for utilizing the strut-and-tie model for the analysis and design of hammerhead piers. As was stated in section 4.3, an increase in tensile reinforcing was incurred by the AASHTO LRFD [12] strut-and-tie procedure.
93
REFERENCE
1. 2.
Ritter (1899) The Hennebique Design Method (Die Bauweise Hennebique) Morsch (1920) Der Eisenbetonbau-Seine Theorie und Anwendung (Reinforced Ed., Witter, Concrete Construction-Theory and Application) 5th 1922
Stutgart, V.1 Part 1, 1920, Part 2,
3.
Schlaich, J, Schafer, K & Jennewein, M, (1987) Toward a consistent design of structural concrete , Prestressed Concrete Institute
Journal, Vol 32, 4
No.3, May-June, pp 74-150
ACI Committee 318, Standard Building Code. Strut-and-Tie models. ACI Concrete International Magazine June 2001, pp. 125-132
5.
AASTHO LFD Stantard Specifications, Sixteenth Edition, American Association os State Highway and Tranportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 1996.
6.
Liang, Q. Q Uy, B., and Steven G.P. Performance-Based Optimisation for Strut-Tie Modeling of Structural Concrete Journal of Structural Engineering Vol. 128 June 2002: pp 815-823.
7.
Schlaich, J. and Schafer, K., Design and Detailing of Structural Concrete Using Strut-and-Tie Models, The Structural Engineer, Vol 69, No.6 March 1991, pp. 113-125
8.
Yun and Rameriz, (1996) Strength of Struts and nodes in strut-and-tie model, Journal of Structural Engineering Vol. 122 Jan 1996: p.20-9.
9.
Schlaich, J. Schafer, K., and Jennewein, M., Toward a Consistent Design of Structural Concrete Institute, Vol. 32, No. 3, May-June 1987, pp. 74150.
10.
Collin, M. P., and Mitchell, D., 1991, Presstressed Concrete Structures, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
94 11. Kani, M.W,; Huggin, M, W.; and Wiltkopp, P.F., 1979, Kani on Shear in Reinforced Concrete, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Canada. 12 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification, Second Edition, American Association of State Highway and Tranportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 1988.

Analysis and Design of Hammer Head Bridge Pier Using Strut and Tie Method

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Analysis and Design of Hammer Head Bridge Pier Using Strut and Tie Method

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF HAMMERHEAD BRIDGE PIER USING STRUT AND TIE METHOD.

ABDUL KADIR BIN AHYAT

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

ABDUL KADIR BIN AHYAT

Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

PAGE i ii iii iv v vi viii xi xii xiii ivx xv xvi

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

Introduction Problem Statement Objective Scope of Study

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4

3.1 3.2 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3

ix 3.4.3.2 3.4.3.3 Calculation for Inclined Strut Secondary Reinforcement 75 77

RESULT AND ANALYSIS

4.1 4.2 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.3

Introduction Analysis of Result Possibility of Cracking Phase Construction Discussion of Results

Introduction Recommendation Strut-and-Tie Design Procedure For Hammerhead piers

5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3

SUMMARY AND CONLUSION 6.1 6.2 Summary Conclusions 89 90

3.1 3.2 3.3

2.1 2.2 2.3

2.4 2.5 2.6

2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.11

3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5

2.2 Overview of Strut-and-Tie Modeling

Figure 2.1 ( B-Region and D-Region)

Adequate Selection of Truss Members

= force in strut or tie i = length of member i = mean strain of member i

General Strength of Truss Members

Basic Type of Struts in a 2-D Member: (a) Prismatic (b) Bottle-

2.4.1 Strength Requirement

Rules in Selecting Strut-and-Tie Models

Strength of Tensile Ties

2.4.1.3 Strength of Compressive Strut

Strut Strength (ACI A.3)

The nominal strength of a Strut, Fns , is defined as Fns = fcu Ac

The effective compresive strength, fcu , is defined as fcu = 0.85 where:

= steel ratio of the i-th layer of reinforcement crossing that strut

= angle between the axis of a strut and the bars

2.4.1.4 Node Strength

Node Strength (ACI A.5)

The nominal strength of a Nodal Zone, Fnn, is defined as Fnn = fcu An

The effective compresive strength, fcu, is defined as fcu = 0.85

fc = concrete compressive strength

2.4.5 Anchorage Requirements (ACI A.4.3)

2.4.6 Serviceability Requirements (ACI RA.2.1)

19 2.5 Shear Concerns in Strut-and-Tie Models

Figure 2.7 - Inclined cracking

Figure 2.8 - Truss like action

Figure 2.9 - Analogous truss

Figure 2.10 Truss analogy

AASHTO LFD AND LRFD SPECIFICATIONS

from the fiber of maximum

shall not be taken less than 0.65.

2.6.3 Design for Flexure

that would produce

balanced strain conditions for the section. The portion of

Figure 2.12. Rectangular Section with Tension Reinforcement Only.

Figure 2.13. Rectangular Section with Compression and Tension Reinforcement.

The balanced reinforcement ratio, , is then given by Article 8.16.3.2.2 as:

and the balanced steel ratio is:

f M n = f As - A' s fy d - a 2 + A's fy d - d'

As - A' s fy 0.85f ' cb

f ' s = 87, 000 1 -

87, 000 + fy 87, 000