Structures and Buildings Volume 164 Issue SB1 Grillage analysis of cellular decks with inclined webs Mozos

and Aparicio

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Structures and Buildings 164 February 2011 Issue SB1 Pages 1318 doi: 10.1680/stbu.8.00056 Paper 800056 Received 14/04/2009 Accepted 24/11/2009 Published online 10/01/2011 Keywords: bridges/buildings, structure & design/concrete structures ICE Publishing: All rights reserved

Grillage analysis of cellular decks with inclined webs

Carlos M. Mozos PhD
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering and Buildings, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Ciudad Real, Spain

ngel C. Aparicio PhD A

Professor, Department of Construction Engineering, Technical University of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain

Although grillage analysis is a very popular method for obtaining the response of at slabs and bridge decks, there are very few guidelines on how to apply the method to decks with inclined webs. This paper presents new and more accurate criteria for obtaining the torsion constant of longitudinal and transverse grillage beams and for splitting a deck into longitudinal beams. These criteria are applied in a numerical study of three different decks with inclined webs. The static response of the numerical models under three load cases is compared with the response of threedimensional nite-element numerical models.

Notation
E e1 e2 G J J12 Jeq Mt ST u v w x y z z1 z2 xy 12 xy xy Youngs modulus slab thickness web thickness shear modulus torsion constant torsion constant of portion of deck between y y1 and y y2 torsion constant of equivalent transverse beam with constant cross-section torque distance between transverse beams in the grillage model displacement in x-direction displacement in y-direction displacement in z-direction x-axis coordinate y-axis coordinate z-axis coordinate distance of a point of the slab to grillage plane in z-direction distance of a point of the inclined web to the grillage plane in z-direction angle of the inclined web shear strain in xy plane relative rotation of the end of transverse beam about its longitudinal axis Poissons ratio shear stress shear stress in xy plane curvature in xy plane

2000). For this reason, extensive theoretical research has been focused on developing techniques for modelling continuous three-dimensional (3D) structures using exclusively onedimensional (1D) elements with two nodes and six degrees of freedom per node (Aparicio and Casas, 2001; Hambly, 1991; Hambly and Pennells, 1975; Jaeger and Bakht, 1982; Manterola, 1977, 2000; OBrien and Keoh, 1999; Sawko, 1968). This method has been used for modelling bridge decks through grillage analysis and several research works and guidelines (Aparicio and Casas, 2001; Hambly, 1991; Hambly and Pennells, 1975; Jaeger and Bakht, 1982; Manterola, 1977, 2000; OBrien and Keoh, 1999) provide criteria for applying grillage analysis to different types of bridge decks. In spite of this, only Hambly (1991) has proposed a general procedure for applying grillage analysis to decks with inclined webs. Hambly suggests using, for non-rectangular cells, torsion stiffness provided by the top and bottom slabs, and considering that the centres of the slabs are separated by a distance equal to the average height of the cell. On the other hand, for decks with rectangular cells, Jaeger and Bakht (1982) and Aparicio and Casas (2001) suggest distributing the Saint Venant torsion constant of the deck in proportion to the area enclosed by the cell. This paper deals with how to split a deck into longitudinal beams and how to calculate the torsion constant of the longitudinal and transverse beams when grillage analysis is applied to determine the behaviour of a deck with inclined webs. A new criterion, based on integration of the torsion stiffness provided by each portion of the deck, is presented in Section 2. In the numerical study presented in Section 3, three cellular decks with inclined webs and different depths are studied from a static point of view. The behaviour of each deck is investigated with a plane grillage model obtained with the proposed criteria for splitting the deck and for calculating the torsion constant of the beams. The response is compared with the behaviour of 3D reference models. 13

1.

Introduction

Matrix analysis of structures is an efcient method for evaluating the static and dynamic behaviour of structures (Ryall et al.,

Structures and Buildings Volume 164 Issue SB1

Grillage analysis of cellular decks with inclined webs Mozos and Aparicio

2.

Torsion constant of beams in grillage analysis applied to decks with inclined webs

and the shear stress is

A total torque M acting on the deck generates torques M i and shear forces Vi on the grillage longitudinal beams and torques on the transverse beams (Figure 1). Each torque and force produces vertical displacements and rotations about the longitudinal axis on the grillage beams and a shear ow on the slabs and webs of the deck (Calgaro and Virlogeux, 1994; Kollbrunner et al., 1970; Vlassov, 1962). Consequently, the torsion constant must be calculated considering that each portion of the deck rotates along the longitudinal axis of the grillage beam to which it has been assigned. Thus, the torsion constant J12 of a portion of deck between y y1 and y y2 (Figure 2) can be obtained by summing the torsion stiffness provided by every differential portion dy. For a portion dy between y y1 and y yc, the torque is

4:

xy 2 zG xy

the torsion curvature can be obtained by integrating the differential torque dMt from y1 to y2

xy yc
5:
y1

M 12 t y2 2 2 G 2 ( e1 z2 G2( e1 z2 1 e2 z2 ) d y 1 e2 z2 ) d y
yc

1:

e2 d yz2 dM t e1 d yz1 cos cos

Thus, the torsion constant of a longitudinal beam that represents the portion of deck between y y1 and y y2 is

J
and for dy between y yc and y y2, the torque is

12

"

yc y1

2 ( e1 z2 1 e 2 z2 ) d y

2:

dM t e1 d yz1 cos

e2 d yz2 cos

6:

y2
yc

# ( e1 z2 1 e2 z2 2) dy

Since the shear strain is

3:

xy

xy @ u @v @2 w 2 z 2 z xy @ y @x @ x@ y G

In the grillage model, a transverse beam 12 (Figure 3) with a non-variable torsion constant Jeq is used. This equivalent torsion constant is obtained by considering equality of the relative rotations of ends 1 and 2 of both variable and non-variable beams

Mi

M Vi

7:

12

xT
0

Mt Mt dx xT GJ GJ eq

Figure 1. Torques and shear forces on grillage beams due to torsion

where xT is dened in Figure 3. Considering the shear stress at sections AA and BB (Figure 3), the torsion constant at these sections is
z

y2 yc

dy
z2 z1

dy
e1

y1

c.o.g.

Grillage plane

z2

e2

Figure 2. Shear ow on deck cross-section

14

Structures and Buildings Volume 164 Issue SB1

Grillage analysis of cellular decks with inclined webs Mozos and Aparicio

B xT xc

A ST ST

e1

y 1 x

zc

c.o.g.

zT

e2

z2

AA B A

z2

z1

z1

BB

Figure 3. Local system of coordinates for transverse beam 12, BT12

8:

  e2 2 z ST J 2 e1 z2 1 cos 2

3.

Numerical analysis

where the sign depends on the relative position of the shear stress ow on the inclined web and the centre of gravity (c.o.g.). Thus, the relative rotation of the beam ends becomes

The static behaviour of three decks with inclined webs was studied using grillage models and compared with the behaviour of 3D nite-element reference models (in all cases, a 31.0 m long cantilever). The software used in the numerical analysis was Sostik version 2.3. 3.1 Studied decks Figure 4 illustrates the three decks, taken from the parametric study of Walther et al. (1999). The distance between diaphragms (6.20 m) is dened by the anchorages of the stays, and the thickness of the diaphragms is 0.35 m. The slabs, webs and diaphragms are concrete with an elastic modulus E 36 342.4 MPa and Poissons ratio 0.2. 3.2 Reference numerical models A 3D nite-element reference model was developed for each deck. Figure 5 shows the reference model of the 1.55 m deep deck (Figure 4(b)).

12

xc
x0

G2[ e1 z2 1 xT
xc

Mt dx ( e2 = cos ) z2 2 ] ST Mt dx ( e2 = cos ) z2 2 ] ST

G2[ e1 z2 1

9:

Mt xT GJ eq

where the lower limit x0 is dened by

8 <
10:

"

x0 : zc

cos e2

 e 1 z2 1

e2 1 z1 2

9 #1=2 =

xT ; zT

in order to provide a minimum torsion stiffness at the initial end of the beam. Thus, the equivalent torsion constant of the transverse beam is

3.3 Grillage numerical models The grillage mesh, with longitudinal beams BL1 and BL2 and transverse beams BT12 and BT22, is shown in Figure 6. The grillage plane coincides with the principal axis of the deck as a whole. Longitudinal and transverse cuts are placed midway between the grillage members and the deck portions are assigned to the closed grillage beam. The criteria used for calculating areas and inertia of the grillage members are as follows. (a) The cross-sectional area assigned to each beam is the area of the portion of the deck that is represented by the beam. (b) In-plane shear deformation has been included in the bending about z-axis deformation. Consequently, the beams are considered as shear-rigid for forces acting along the y-axis. (c) The shear area about the z-axis was obtained by considering the criteria suggested by Hambly (1991). 15

J eq xT

( xc
2 x0 2[ e1 z1

dx ( e2 = cos ) z2 2 ] ST )

11:

xT
xc

dx 2 2[ e1 z2 ( e 2 = cos ) z2 ] ST 1

Structures and Buildings Volume 164 Issue SB1

Grillage analysis of cellular decks with inclined webs Mozos and Aparicio

(d ) The torsion constant of the longitudinal and transverse beams was obtained by applying the criterion presented in Section 2.
250 250 022

021 020 (a) 020 021 016 020 (b) 018 016

(e) The bending inertia about the y-axis of the longitudinal beams is the second moment of area about the y-axis, which is located at the same level as the c.o.g. of the deck. Otherwise, the bending inertia of the transverse beams is the second moment of area about the c.o.g. of the portion of the deck in each section. ( f ) The in-plane bending inertia suggested by Hambly (1991) for cruciform elements was considered.

155

115

225

017 017 018 (c)

3.4 Load cases The static behaviour of the models was investigated for two concentrated loads Q acting in the three different cases (Q1 to Q3) shown in Figure 7.

Figure 4. Deck dimensions (in metres): (a) deck D1.15; (b) deck D1.55; (c) deck D2.25

z y

Figure 5. 3D nite-element reference model for deck D1.55

3.5 Results The displacements w and v of nodes 1 to 4 (Figure 6) along the z- and y-axes were obtained by static linear analysis for each grillage model and for the equivalent nodes of the reference models for load cases Q1 to Q3. Figure 8 shows the ratio of the displacements of the nodes of the grillage model to the reference model. Note that all of the grillage models show homogeneous behaviour and provide an accurate response under longitudinal bending, torsion and transverse bending. The criteria proposed here for splitting the deck and calculating the torsion constant of the beams thus allows reproduction of the static response of the decks under torsion (load case Q2). In this case, the maximum error, 4.5%, is smaller than the error incurred using the criterion proposed in Hambly (1991), which is close to 14%, or the criterion proposed by Aparicio and Casas (2001) and Jaeger and Bakht (1982) (30%) for the same decks (see Mozos (2007)). Load case Q3 shows an acceptable response of the grillage models under transverse bending.
z y x

31

00

046

354

500

354

046

BL
1 BL

BL2

BL1
BT1 2
4 3 2

2
2
B T22

BT12 BL1 BL2

BT22

BT12 BL1 BL2

BT1

5 15

Figure 6. Grillage mesh and reference nodes 14 (dimensions in metres)

16

Structures and Buildings Volume 164 Issue SB1

Grillage analysis of cellular decks with inclined webs Mozos and Aparicio

Q1 z y x Q Q

Q2

Q3 y x

y x

Q Q Q Q

Figure 7. Load cases; Q 1000 kN

1013

108

097

1012

106

096

wgrillage/wFEM

wgrillage/wFEM

1011

104

wgrillage/wFEM
3 Node (b)

095

1010

102

094

1009

100

093

1008

2 Node (a)

098

092

2 Node (c)

Deck D115

Deck D155

Deck D225

Figure 8. Ratio of the displacements of grillage models to niteelement reference model for decks D1.15, D1.55 and D2.25 (nodes 14) under (a) load Q1, (b) load Q2 and (c) load Q3

4.

Conclusions

The objectives of this study were to present a new and more accurate criterion for obtaining the torsion constant of longitudinal and transverse grillage beams, and to dene a criterion for splitting a deck into longitudinal beams. Three cellular decks of different depths were studied from a static point of view using plane grillage models. Such grillage models were obtained by placing longitudinal cuts midway between the grillage members and assigning deck portions to the closed grillage beam. The torsion constant of the longitudinal and transverse beams was obtained using the criterion described. The response of the grillage models was compared with the 3D nite-element reference models. The following conclusions can be drawn from the numerical analysis.

(a) The proposed criterion for obtaining the torsion constant of the beams allows one to obtain a grillage model with a torsion stiffness very close to the cellular deck and to reproduce its static behaviour under torsional load with adequate precision. (b) Splitting the deck into longitudinal beams mainly affects the transverse bending response of the grillage model. The results obtained by placing cuts midway between the longitudinal beams yield acceptable accuracy.

Acknowledgements
The authors thank the Spanish Junta de Comunidades de CastillaLa Mancha and the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science for nancial support under research projects PBI-05-031 and BIA2006-15471-C02-02 respectively. 17

Structures and Buildings Volume 164 Issue SB1

Grillage analysis of cellular decks with inclined webs Mozos and Aparicio

REFERENCES

Manterola J (2000) Puentes. E.T.S. de Ingenieros de Caminos,

Aparicio AC and Casas JR (2001) Apuntes de Puentes. E.T.S. de

Canales y Puertos de Madrid, Madrid.

Mozos CM (2007) Theoretical and Experimental Study on the

Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos de Barcelona, Barcelona. Calgaro J and Virlogeux M (1994) Projet et Construction des Ponts. Analyse Structurale des Tabliers de Ponts, vol. 2, 2nd edn. Presses de le cole Nationale des Ponts et Chausse es, Paris. Hambly EC (1991) Bridge Deck Behaviour, 2nd edn. Taylor & Francis, London. Hambly E and Pennells E (1975) Grillage analysis applied to cellular bridge decks. The Structural Engineer 53(7): 267275. Jaeger L and Bakht B (1982) The grillage analogy in bridge analysis. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 9(2): 224 235. Kollbrunner C, Basler K and Eperon PA (1970) Torsion: ` le tude des Structures. Spes S.A., Lausanne. Application a Manterola J (1977) Ca lculo de tableros de puente por el me todo n y Acero 122(1): 93149. del emparrillado. Hormigo

Structural Response of Cable Stayed Bridges to a Stay Failure. Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Ciudad Real (in Spanish). OBrien E and Keoh D (1999) Bridge Deck Analysis, vol. 1, 1st edn. Taylor & Francis, London. Ryall M, Parke G and Harging J (2000) Manual of Bridge Engineering, 1st edn. Thomas Telford, London. Sawko F (1968) Recent developments in the analysis of steel bridges using electronic computers. Proceedings of Conference on Steel Bridges. British Constructional Steelwork Association, London. pp. 110. ces Longues En Voiles Minces, 10th edn. Vlassov BA (1962) Pie ditions Editions Nationales Physico-mathe matiques, E Eyrolles, Paris. a P and Klein J-F (1999) Cable Walther R, Houriet B, Isler W, Mo Stayed Bridges, 2nd edn. Thomas Telford, London.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to the editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be forwarded to the author(s) for a reply and, if considered appropriate by the editorial panel, will be published as a discussion in a future issue of the journal. Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in by civil engineering professionals, academics and students. Papers should be 20005000 words long (brieng papers should be 10002000 words long), with adequate illustrations and references. You can submit your paper online via www.icevirtuallibrary.com/content/journals, where you will also nd detailed author guidelines. 18