International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)

Volume 8, Issue 1, January 2017, pp. 639645 Article ID: IJCIET_08_01_074

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=1
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

SOIL INTERACTION STUDIES ON PRESTRESSED

CONCRETE BRIDGE USING FINITE ELEMENT
METHOD
Ramya. T
PG Student, Civil Engineering Department,
K L University, Vaddeswaram, A. P, India

K. Shyam Chamberlin
Professor, Civil Engineering Department,
K L University, Vaddeswaram, A. P, India

ABSTRACT
Objectives: The strategy which is utilized to overcome solid shortcoming in tension is
prestressed concrete (PSC) bridges. In this paper we are utilizing prestressed concrete in beam
so that the Section remains Un split under service loads and with a specific end goal to anticipate
erosion of structure brought on because of water leakage through joints. Soil interaction impacts
are noteworthy for bridges in soil settlement under footing conditions where the load is applied.
Because of this reason soil structure interaction studies consider for this extension are examined.
Methods/Analysis: In this paper we are thinking about two models, one without soil interaction
and the other with soil interaction. Finite element analysis is utilized for the assessment of
structures and frameworks, giving an exact figure of a part's reaction subjected to thermal and
structural loads. Finite element analysis (FEA) system is generally utilized for major or more
muddled extension structures. The live load and moving burdens are connected utilizing ANSYS.
Findings: The primary target of this paper is to concentrate on the contrast between the BM, SF
and deflection in girder and chunk while applying the dead load and live load under these two
conditions. The BM, SF and deflection values are increased without soil association condition
when contrasted with soil cooperation. Applications: Soil interaction impacts are noteworthy
for bridges in soil settlement under footing conditions where the load is applied. Because of this
reason soil structure interaction studies consider for this extension are examined so this method
is applicable for bridges to get safe and economical bridge designing.
Key words: Soil Interaction, Bridge, Bending Moment (BM), Shear Force (SF), Deflection.
Cite this Article: Ramya. T and K. Shyam Chamberlin, Soil Interaction Studies on Prestressed
Concrete Bridge Using Finite Element Method. International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology, 8(1), 2017, pp. 639645.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=1

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 639 editor@iaeme.com

 Ramya. T and K. Shyam Chamberlin

1. INTRODUCTION
Prestressed concrete (PSC) bridges are a technique which defeats concrete weakness in tension.
Prestressing tendons (i.e, high tensile cables or bars) are utilized to render a cinching load which creates
a compressive anxiety that equipoise the tensile stress, otherwise bending loadwould be experienced by
solid pressure part1. The principle reason for building PSC Bridge is to counteract split control and it
likewise keeps the erosion of the structure because of water leakage through joints. Here we are thinking
about soil structure connection studies to take out the instability of the extensions. For this kind of
extensions the greatest vulnerability is the response of the soil at foundation piles. In soil collaboration
condition the supporting soil and bridge is thinking about one perfect unit and here the dirt response is
nonlinear to handle this we need to give springs2. Because of that reason we are thinking about soil
properties condition for planning and examination of the soil structure framework to get effective and
economical bridge4. The trends in bending moment, shear force and deflection in central and end
longitudinal girders and deck slab due to dead load, live load in combination of thermal loads. However
the changes in soil properties behind the abutment and around the piles do not affect significantly the
performance of super structure3. To pick up a superior comprehension about this extension at soil
connection concentrates on we are utilizing a 3D FEA is completed on PSC bridge utilizing
programming ANSYS16 and imposed load was presented according to IRC-6(2000) utilizing
ANSYS16. With the assistance of that diagram we can give the multilinear springs for the abutment
walls and pile node at pier4.

2. METHODOLOGY
To examine the conduct of the prestressed concrete bridge under different load combinations of dead
load and live load cases all through the road bed in the longer span direction. The live load is connected
according to IRC6-2000 utilizing ANSYS16. Here the product consequently ascertains theBM, SF and
deflection to applying the both dead and live loads all through the bridge deck in longitudinal direction.
The bridge designing is presented as shown in Figure 1. and Figure 2.

Figure 1 Model of PSC Bridge

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 640 editor@iaeme.com

 Soil Interaction Studies On Prestressed Concrete Bridge Using Finite Element Method

Figure 2 Top view of the modeled PSC Bridge

deck slab:- length: 50mt; width :9.5mt; thickness 0.25mt
Abutment:-height 5.7mt; width 8.5mt
Girders: - longitudinal girders: 3 nos
Cross girders: 3nos
Pier: - height 4.9mt; dia 1.8mt
Piles:-Nos 18; fixity depth 6mt, dia 1mt

2.1. PSC BRIDGEMODELLING

The structure comprises of:
1. The road bed is developed using shell elements and the girders as beam element.
2. The cables are placed in the longitudinal girders nothing but the beams to prevent the bridge from the
cracks
3. Six piles are associated with every abutment wall and these piles permitting the full moment transfer. The
piles are demonstrated as circular component with common node for pile and abutment walls utilizing
structural analysis software, ANSYS16.

2.2. CALCULATION OF MULTILINEAR SPRINGS FOR ABUTMENT AND PILES

The multilinear spring qualities are figured by doing the plate load test. The test strategy is displayed as
appeared in beneath

2.2.1. PLATE LOAD TEST PROCEDURE

The plate load test is led at establishment level (at 2.10 meters beneath the channel bed at - 0.775meter).
The dirt at the establishment level is topped off sand of 0.6meter thickness over silty earth and ballies
of 10cm width and of 6 meter length is crashed into the sand and mud at an interim of 1.0m c/c in a
stunned way at this area. The test was performed on the sand bed to a size of 2.25 m x 2.25m (5 times
the measure of the test plate for the plate load test considered). The plate load test was done according
to Seems to be: 1888 1982. The measure of the plate is 450mm x 450mm and 25mm thick. The graph
for the plate load test data is shown in Figure 3.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 641 editor@iaeme.com

 Ramya. T and K. Shyam Chamberlin

Figure 3 Plate load test data

From this graph we can get the estimations of the force and displacement by doling out the load and
displacement. With the assistance of ANSYS16 we can give the spring values. The force and
displacement are given in underneath Table1.

Table 1 Multilinear Spring Values

LOAD (tones) DISPLACEMENT (mm)
0 0
0.7 2
1.6 3
2.2 4
2.7 5
2.9 6
3.5 8
5 9
5.4 10
5.8 11
6.4 12
7.4 13
7.8 14
8 15
8.4 16
9.4 18
9.6 19
10.4 20
12.2 22
12.6 23

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 642 editor@iaeme.com

 Soil Interaction Studies On Prestressed Concrete Bridge Using Finite Element Method

By utilizing this table we can relegate the multilinear springs for the both abutment walls and pile
node at pier. We are doing this method for this bridge to handle the nonlinear soil conduct by applying
the multilinear springs. The PSC bridge designing with and without soil interaction is presented as
shown in Figure 4, Figure 5.

Figure 4 PSC Bridge with soil interaction condition

Figure 5 PSC Bridge without soil interaction condition

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The outcomes are thought about for the BM, deflection and SF for the middle longitudinal girder, end
longitudinal girder and deck slab and are introduced as figure considering the impacts of soil for PSC
spans.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 643 editor@iaeme.com

 Ramya. T and K. Shyam Chamberlin

The bending moment values of deck slab, middle girder and end girder are discussed in fig6 for the
conditions of with and without soil interaction. The bending moment values are increased in without
soil interaction condition while compared it with soil interaction as shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6 BENDING MOMENT

The shear force values of deck slab, middle girder and end girder are discussed in fig7 for the
conditions of with and without soil interaction. The shear force values are increased in without soil
interaction condition while compared it with soil interaction as shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7 SHEAR FORCE

The Deflection values of deck slab, middle girder and end girder are discussed in fig8 for the
conditions of with and without soil interaction. The deflection values are increased in without soil
interaction condition while compared it with soil interaction as shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8 DEFLECTION

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 644 editor@iaeme.com

 Soil Interaction Studies On Prestressed Concrete Bridge Using Finite Element Method

4. CONCLUSION
The bending moment estimations of deck slab is expanded by 28%, middle girder expanded by 24%,
end girder expanded by 26% in without soil association condition when contrasted with soil cooperation.
The shear force estimations of deck slab, end girder and middle girder is expanded by 29% in without
soil collaboration condition when contrasted with soil cooperation. The deflection estimations of deck
slab, end girder and middle girder is expanded by 28% in without soil association condition when
contrasted with soil cooperation.

REFERENCES
[1] Shreedher R, Vinod H, Iftikar C. Behavior of integral abutment bridge with and without soil
interaction. International journal of scientific & engineering research. 2012 November; 3(11), 1-6.
[2] Spyrakos C C. Seismic behavior of bridge piers including soil-structure interaction. Computer and
structures. 1992; 43(2), 373-384.
[3] Thanoon W A, Abdhulrazeg A A, Noorzaeia Z, Zaafar M S, Kohnehpooshi O. Soil structure
interaction for integral abutment bridge using spring analogy approach. Materials Science and
Engineering. 2011; 17, 1-16.
[4] Abdullah Anwar, Sabih Ahmad, Yusuf Jamal and M.Z. Khan, Assessment of Liquefaction Potential
of Soil Using Multi-Linear Regression Modeling, International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology, 7(1), 2016, pp. 373-415.
[5] Akpila, S. B. and Omunguye, I. W.Derivative of Stress Strain, Deviatoric Stress and Undrained
Cohesion Models Based on Soil Modulus of Cohesive Soils. International Journal of Civil
Engineering and Technology, 6(7), 2015, pp 34-43.
[6] John Paul V. and Antony Rachel Sneha M., Effect of Random Inclusion of Bamboo Fibers on
Strength Behaviour of Flyash Treated Black Cotton Soil. International Journal of Civil Engineering
and Technology, 7(5), 2016, pp.153160.
[7] Alfaiate J, Pires E B, Martins J A C A. Finite Element Analysis of Non-Prescribed Crack Propagation
in Concrete. Computers & Structures. 1997; 63(1), 17-26.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 645 editor@iaeme.com