Examination of level of analysis accuracy for curved I-girder bridges through comparisons to field data

D. Nevling, D. Linzell, J. Laman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To evaluate the accuracy of different levels of analysis used to predict horizontally curved steel I-girder bridge response, a field test was performed on a three-span structure. Collected strain data were reduced to determine girder vertical and bottom flange lateral bending moments. Experimental moments were compared to numerical moments obtained from three commonly employed levels of analysis. Level 1 analysis includes two manual calculation methods: a line girder analysis method described in the AASHTO Guide Specification for Horizontally Curved Highway Bridges, and the V-load method. Grillage models represent Level 2 and were created using three commercially available computer programs: SAP2000, MDX, and DESCUS. Level 3 consists of three-dimensional (3D) finite element models created using SAP2000 and the BSDI 3D system. Responses obtained from each level are compared and discussed for a single radial cross section of the structure, and the compared results involve truck loads and placement schemes that do not represent those used for bridge design. The field test and numerical data presented are used solely to determine the accuracy of each level of analysis for predicting structure response to a specific live load at a specific cross section. Results showed that Level 2 and Level 3 analyses predict girder vertical bending moment distributions more accurately than Level 1 analyses throughout the tested cross section. The comparisons indicate that Level 3 girder vertical bending moment distributions offered no appreciable increase in accuracy over Level 2 analyses. The study also indicates that both Level 1 and Level 3 analyses provide bottom flange lateral bending moment distributions that do not correlate well with field test results for the studied bridge cross section.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)160-168
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Bridge Engineering
Volume11
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2006

Fingerprint

Bending moments
Flanges
Highway bridges
Trucks
Computer program listings
Specifications
Steel

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Civil and Structural Engineering
  • Building and Construction

Cite this

@article{9680a1b99303453e877261e73a6857ea,
title = "Examination of level of analysis accuracy for curved I-girder bridges through comparisons to field data",
abstract = "To evaluate the accuracy of different levels of analysis used to predict horizontally curved steel I-girder bridge response, a field test was performed on a three-span structure. Collected strain data were reduced to determine girder vertical and bottom flange lateral bending moments. Experimental moments were compared to numerical moments obtained from three commonly employed levels of analysis. Level 1 analysis includes two manual calculation methods: a line girder analysis method described in the AASHTO Guide Specification for Horizontally Curved Highway Bridges, and the V-load method. Grillage models represent Level 2 and were created using three commercially available computer programs: SAP2000, MDX, and DESCUS. Level 3 consists of three-dimensional (3D) finite element models created using SAP2000 and the BSDI 3D system. Responses obtained from each level are compared and discussed for a single radial cross section of the structure, and the compared results involve truck loads and placement schemes that do not represent those used for bridge design. The field test and numerical data presented are used solely to determine the accuracy of each level of analysis for predicting structure response to a specific live load at a specific cross section. Results showed that Level 2 and Level 3 analyses predict girder vertical bending moment distributions more accurately than Level 1 analyses throughout the tested cross section. The comparisons indicate that Level 3 girder vertical bending moment distributions offered no appreciable increase in accuracy over Level 2 analyses. The study also indicates that both Level 1 and Level 3 analyses provide bottom flange lateral bending moment distributions that do not correlate well with field test results for the studied bridge cross section.",
author = "D. Nevling and D. Linzell and J. Laman",
year = "2006",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2006)11:2(160)",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "160--168",
journal = "Journal of Bridge Engineering",
issn = "1084-0702",
publisher = "American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)",
number = "2",

}

Examination of level of analysis accuracy for curved I-girder bridges through comparisons to field data. / Nevling, D.; Linzell, D.; Laman, J.

In: Journal of Bridge Engineering, Vol. 11, No. 2, 01.03.2006, p. 160-168.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Examination of level of analysis accuracy for curved I-girder bridges through comparisons to field data

AU - Nevling, D.

AU - Linzell, D.

AU - Laman, J.

PY - 2006/3/1

Y1 - 2006/3/1

N2 - To evaluate the accuracy of different levels of analysis used to predict horizontally curved steel I-girder bridge response, a field test was performed on a three-span structure. Collected strain data were reduced to determine girder vertical and bottom flange lateral bending moments. Experimental moments were compared to numerical moments obtained from three commonly employed levels of analysis. Level 1 analysis includes two manual calculation methods: a line girder analysis method described in the AASHTO Guide Specification for Horizontally Curved Highway Bridges, and the V-load method. Grillage models represent Level 2 and were created using three commercially available computer programs: SAP2000, MDX, and DESCUS. Level 3 consists of three-dimensional (3D) finite element models created using SAP2000 and the BSDI 3D system. Responses obtained from each level are compared and discussed for a single radial cross section of the structure, and the compared results involve truck loads and placement schemes that do not represent those used for bridge design. The field test and numerical data presented are used solely to determine the accuracy of each level of analysis for predicting structure response to a specific live load at a specific cross section. Results showed that Level 2 and Level 3 analyses predict girder vertical bending moment distributions more accurately than Level 1 analyses throughout the tested cross section. The comparisons indicate that Level 3 girder vertical bending moment distributions offered no appreciable increase in accuracy over Level 2 analyses. The study also indicates that both Level 1 and Level 3 analyses provide bottom flange lateral bending moment distributions that do not correlate well with field test results for the studied bridge cross section.

AB - To evaluate the accuracy of different levels of analysis used to predict horizontally curved steel I-girder bridge response, a field test was performed on a three-span structure. Collected strain data were reduced to determine girder vertical and bottom flange lateral bending moments. Experimental moments were compared to numerical moments obtained from three commonly employed levels of analysis. Level 1 analysis includes two manual calculation methods: a line girder analysis method described in the AASHTO Guide Specification for Horizontally Curved Highway Bridges, and the V-load method. Grillage models represent Level 2 and were created using three commercially available computer programs: SAP2000, MDX, and DESCUS. Level 3 consists of three-dimensional (3D) finite element models created using SAP2000 and the BSDI 3D system. Responses obtained from each level are compared and discussed for a single radial cross section of the structure, and the compared results involve truck loads and placement schemes that do not represent those used for bridge design. The field test and numerical data presented are used solely to determine the accuracy of each level of analysis for predicting structure response to a specific live load at a specific cross section. Results showed that Level 2 and Level 3 analyses predict girder vertical bending moment distributions more accurately than Level 1 analyses throughout the tested cross section. The comparisons indicate that Level 3 girder vertical bending moment distributions offered no appreciable increase in accuracy over Level 2 analyses. The study also indicates that both Level 1 and Level 3 analyses provide bottom flange lateral bending moment distributions that do not correlate well with field test results for the studied bridge cross section.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=32944462138&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=32944462138&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2006)11:2(160)

DO - 10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2006)11:2(160)

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:32944462138

VL - 11

SP - 160

EP - 168

JO - Journal of Bridge Engineering

JF - Journal of Bridge Engineering

SN - 1084-0702

IS - 2

ER -