Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
A R C H BRIDGE D E S I G N
By Shigera K u r a n i s h i , 1 M . ASCE and Tetsuya Yabuki, 2 A. M . ASCE
ABSTRACT: Design criteria for lateral load effect of two-hinged, parabolic, steel
arch bridge structures are presented on the basis of the ultimate limit state
design concept. The arch structures are composed of two main ribs connected
by a lateral bracing system. The load combination that is considered consists
of vertical loading and practical lateral loading to which bridge structures are
actually subjected. Based on results of their load carrying capacity analyzed by
three-dimensional finite element method, ways of incorporating practical lateral
loading effects in the ultimate strength designing of steel arch bridge structures
are presented. The required out-of-plane rigidities of steel arch bridge struc-
tures are also proposed.
INTRODUCTION
Downloaded 28 Sep 2010 to 132.234.251.211. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
In this paper, the ultimate strength design method of steel arch bridge
structures, which follows the aforementioned conventional design con-
cept, is presented. The design formulas proposed in the paper for or-
dinary two-hinged steel arch ribs comprise the required rigidities for steel
arch bridge structures in order to ensure their out-of-plane structural
functions until to the ultimate state and the practical formula which eval-
uates the effect of the lateral loading on the ultimate strength.
SCOPE OF APPLICATION
=
^OUT , U)
/ 4,(~j +Iay
in which b = the distance between the arch ribs; and Iay = the out-of-
plane moment of inertia of an arch rib. Generally, practical lateral loads
such as wind loads (1) applied on steel arch bridge structures are not so
intensive and may be less than 0.1 pp for an arch rib (15) in which pp is
a critical load intensity which gives the squash axial force at the spring-
ing of the arch ribs calculated by the first order elastic analysis for the
arches flattened out into the horizontal plane through their supports and
is given by (15):
P r ^ (2)
Therefore, the intensity of the practical lateral load is also taken as 0.1 pp
in this paper. Shear modulus G is 81 kN/mm 2 .
Generally speaking, the major structural properties of an arch rib that
affect the ultimate strength are its rise/span ratio, slenderness ratio, yield
stress level, cross-sectional properties, and distribution pattern and in-
tensity of residual stresses. Among them, the cross-sectional properties
are standardized here because of the smaller influence on the ultimate
strength as determined by the preceding investigations (5,13). The dis-
2264
Downloaded 28 Sep 2010 to 132.234.251.211. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
<K
*3
Zl
-B 1
lb)
FIG. 1.-Arch Geometry, Loading and Reference Cross Section: (a) Configuration
of an Arch Rib and Loading; (h) Profiles of Cross Section and Assumed Distri-
bution Pattern of Residual Stress
[iT- (4)
GIT be
2265
Downloaded 28 Sep 2010 to 132.234.251.211. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
in which EIb = flexural rigidity of a cross beam about its axis parallel to
the longitudinal direction of an arch rib; GIT = torsional rigidity of an
arch rib; and c = a panel length of the lateral bracing system. The rigidity
parameter |xs and \iT is considered in this paper from 1/1.5-1/150 and
from 0-50, respectively, to check their effects on the spatial ultimate
strength behaviors of the arch structures.
A loading path in which the lateral load is applied first and then the
vertical load is increased to the collapse load is used for all parametric
studies herein, based on the investigated results (15) on the effects of
different loading paths for the arch structures under combined vertical
and lateral loads.
p
A f po = 'V r '* 0 ' 5 ' V ' 0 , Aw=20
>
/- )- IE
1W 20 r^
1 - in : 03
I
'-15
./ h/ L= 0-3
W 40
1 ^r ^
^
"I u-
1 10 100
2266
Downloaded 28 Sep 2010 to 132.234.251.211. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
Imax'Sp
A 1IJ = O.lp,P r = 0 5 , A =200, X
IN OUT
=20
i_5J;
i \
"[_h/L = 0-1S J ti
1 (T 0
V
\ 1
1
[_]_[ Ml
y
i a 0
TT"
1 1
=
\\v
l
I h/L= 0-3 J
i.o ~fi
hi "s
FIG. 3.Effect of Lateral Bracing Rigidity and Cross Beam Rigidity on Maximum
Load Intensity
the arch increase spatially as the applied vertical load increases, when
the stiffness parameter \is is smaller than 1/15. On the other hand, when
Us is larger than 1/15, the effect of the lateral loading on the ultimate
strength is not significant.
2. When the stiffness parameter (xs is larger than 1/15, the out-of-plane
bending moment and torsional moment which are produced in the arch
ribs at the ultimate state are approximately equivalent to the moments
given by the first order elastic analysis.
3. In the arch having the lateral bracings whose the stiffness param-
eter |xs is smaller than 1/15 the arch is advisable to ensure the cross-
sectional stiffness as a whole for the lateral load, using the cross beams
with the rigidity specified by (JLT S 10.
In a general way, even for arch bridge structures under combined ver-
tical and practical lateral loads, the critical vertical loading pattern that
results in collapse is unsymmetrical. The lateral loading effect on the
ultimate load carrying capacity under the unsymmetrical vertical loading
2267
Downloaded 28 Sep 2010 to 132.234.251.211. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
is estimated herein by using a strength reduction factor $ to show the
degree of reduction of the ultimate strength induced by the practical
lateral load. It is expressed as follows:
spatial ultimate strength under vertical and lateral loads
* = (7)
planar ultimate strength for same arch under vertical load
Here, the ultimate strength under the combined loads is evaluated by
keeping constant the lateral loads at pv = 0.1pp, while increasing the
vertical loads to collapse.
From a viewpoint of conventional designing, it is desirable that the
structure designed behaves as a planar structure until collapse. Conse-
quently, from the results analyzed as the spatial structures, the cases of
in-plane collapse are selected out and their behaviors are investigated.
Here, "in-plane collapse" means those collapse configurations where in
the out-of-plane deformations and stresses of the arch ribs remain below
certain values, in a practical sense, from the initial lateral loading state
to the ultimate state, while the in-plane displacements and stresses be-
come large showing nonlinear behaviors as the principal vertical loads
increase. On the other hand, "out-of-plane collapse" means such col-
lapse configurations where in the out-of-plane deformations and stresses
also become large showing nonlinear behavior. The results are sum-
marized as shown in Fig. 4. In this figure the ratio of the initial lateral
deflection W0 at the crown of the arch under the practical lateral load to
the span length L is plotted on the abscissa and is considered as an index
factor to evaluate the out-of-plane stiffness of the arch structure as a
whole. W0 is the lateral displacement calculated by the 1st order spatial
structural analysis and the typical results are listed in Table 1. By ap-
plying the regression analysis to the results in Table 1, the relationship
between the nondimensional, initial, lateral displacement W0/L and the
lateral load intensity p0/pp could be expressed as a functional formula
W,0
- v-i (8a)
P?
080
A-1"5 \L, - 10
Downloaded 28 Sep 2010 to 132.234.251.211. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
TABLE 1.-Nondlmensional, Initial, Lateral Deflection (W/L) Calculated by First
*IN s Tdo"~
^^^N. Ayj^ = 3 ^ ^ ^ ^
0 9
""=5^^^.
r = 0 5 , o^=320N/mm J
\XJT= 20
i
08 UUI
/h/l
1tf 1 1 1 L-O
/oT /olT /oT /oT
FIG. 5.Relationship Between Strength Reduction Factor and Rise/Span Ratio
4> = A - B (Ida)
2270
Downloaded 28 Sep 2010 to 132.234.251.211. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
the coefficients A and B are determined as follows:
A = 0.837 X 10"3 x \ I N + 0.895; B = 0.244 X 10~2 X \ I N - 0.181 (10b)
Table 2 shows comparison of some analytical results of the reduction
factor $ for r = 0.75 with the predicted values using Eq. 10. The two
show fairly good agreement from a practical viewpoint. Therefore, Eq.
10 is valid at least within the range of r S 0.75 and this range may be
applicable to usual, practical, steel arch bridges.
2A,q y
1P = (11)
1
1+ , ,
16 U
4 q la
10
1 1 1
h(L=0 1,0-2.0-3
'
h/L = 0-1, 0-2. 03
'
7 %^
h
06
\ .
02 \)UT = 10 & 2
: >, = 30
. 1 1 1 1 1r>
100 150 200 250 300
0-75 -
050-
025-
^7E
0 - - I -
003 0035 004 0045 005
FIG. 7.Relationship Between Strength Reduction Factor and Yield Stress Level
(Under Uniformly Distributed Vertical Loading over Full Span)
From the figure it can be seen that the ultimate vertical loads have a
fairly good linear relationship with the in-plane slenderness ratio and
are less influenced by the rise/span ratios within the range examined
herein. Fig. 7 shows typical relationship between the strength reduction
factor and the yield stress level of the material. As is obvious from the
figure, 4> has a linear functional relationship with the square root of the
yield stress level. Consequently, qa may be expressed in the form of a
single formula as follows:
q
- = (A - B\m)(a - b J^j (12s)
Based on the regression analysis for the values qct calculated by the spa-
tial ultimate strength analysis, the coefficients A, B, a, and 6 are deter-
mined as follows:
A = 1.08 - 2.65 X 10-4XOUT(XOUT - 25); B = 2.9 X 1CT3
- 8 x l(T7\ouT(kouT - 25); a = 2.43; b = 36.6 (12b)
The difference between the spatial ultimate strength predicted by Eq. 12
and the results calculated by the ultimate strength analysis is less than
3% even in the extreme case (X0UT = 40, X]N = 300, and h/L = 0.3) ex-
amined herein.
Generally, lateral-torsional buckling strength should be examined only
for arch bridges having extremely narrow spacing between the ribs com-
pared with the spans and having high rises. Then, if more comprehen-
sive application is desired for the design criteria on the lateral-torsional
buckling strength, it will be necessary that the coefficients A and B in
Eq. 12 should be determined after carrying out parametric analyses in
higher range of the out-of-plane slenderness ratio and the rise/span ra-
tio. The effects of the variation of the principal loading systemhanger
loading or column loadingand of the lateral restraint available at the
supports and elsewhere should be examined also.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
APPENDIX.REFERENCES
1. Japan Road Association, Specification for Highway Bridges, Feb., 1980 (in
Japanese).
2. "Guide to Stability Design Criteria for Metal Structures," Structural Stability
Research Council, B. G. Johnston, ed., 3rd Ed., John Wiley and Sons, New
York, N.Y., 1976.
3. Komatsu, S.7 and Sakimoto, T., "Ultimate Load Carrying Capacity of Steel
Arches," Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 103, ST12, D e c , 1977,
pp. 2323-2336.
4. Kuranishi, S., and Yabuki, T., "Ultimate In-Plane Strength of Two-Hinged
Steel Arches Subjected to Lateral Loads," Transactions of the Japan Society of
Civil Engineers, Vol. 10, 1978, pp. 350-353.
5. Kuranishi, S., and Yabuki, T., "Some Numerical Estimation of Ultimate In-
Plane Strength of Two-Hinged Steel Arches," Proceeding of the Japan Society
of Civil Engineers, No. 287, 1979, pp. 155-158.
6. Kuranishi, S., and Yabuki, T., "Required Out-of-Plane Rigidities of Steel Arch
Bridges with Two Main Arch Ribs Subjected to Vertical and Lateral Loads,"
The Technology Reports of Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan, Vol. 46, 1981,
pp. 47-72.
2273
Downloaded 28 Sep 2010 to 132.234.251.211. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
7. Kuranishi, S., and Yabuki, T., "Effect of Lateral Bracing Rigidities on the
Ultimate Strength of Steel Arch Bridges," Proceeding of the Japan Society of Civil
Engineers, No. 305, 1981, pp. 47-58.
8. Ojalvo, M., and Newman, .M., "Buckling of Naturally Curved and Twisted
Beams," Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Divison, ASCE, Vol. 94, EM5,
May, 1968, pp. 1067-1087.
9. Ojalvo, M., Demuts, E., and Tokarz, F. J., "Out-of-Plane Buckling of Curved
Members," Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 95, ST10, Oct., 1969,
pp. 2305-2316.
10. Sakimoto, T., and Komatsu, S., "Ultimate Strength of Steel Arches under
Lateral Loads," Proceedings of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers, No. 292, 1979,
pp. 83-94.
11. Sakimoto, T., and Komatsu, S., "Ultimate Strength of Arches with Bracing
Systems," Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 108, ST5, May, 1982,
pp. 1064-1076.
12. Shukla, S. N., and Ojalvo, M., "Lateral Buckling of Parabolic Arches with
Tilting Loads," Journal of the Structural Divison, ASCE, Vol. 97, ST6, June,
1971, pp. 1763-1773.
13. Yabuki, T., "Study on Ultimate Strength Design of Steel Arch Bridge Struc-
tures," dissertation presented to Tohoku University, at Sendai, Japan, in May,
1981, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Engineering (in Japanese).
14. Yabuki, T., and Vinnakota, S., "Stability of Steel Arch Bridges: A State-of-
Art Report," Solid Mechanics Archives, Vol. 8, Issue 4, Noordhoff International
Publishers, Ley den, Netherlands, 1983.
15. Yabuki, T., Vinnakota, S., and Kuranishi, S., "Lateral Load Effect on Strength
of Steel Arch Bridge Structures," Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol.
109, ST10, Oct., 1983, pp. 2434-2449.
16. Wen, K. R., and Lange, J., "Curved Beam Element for Arch Buckling Anal-
ysis," Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 107, ST11, Nov., 1981, pp.
2053-2069.
2274
Downloaded 28 Sep 2010 to 132.234.251.211. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit