Sie sind auf Seite 1von 61

ABSTRACT

Integral bridges are becoming popular day by day as they are easy to construct
and require less maintenance efforts due to absence of bearings. There is an
increasing tendency to construct long span bridges. However due to movement
restraints fatigue stresses build up that leads to reduction in useful life. In this
study, an effort has been made to fin out the fatigue life for an integral bridge
subjected to transient loads. In this paper, the results of a transient analysis of
an integral bridge of total length 156 m having 5 continuous spans with the
maximum span of 40 m has been done using ANSYS. The roles of deformation
and von-Misses stress that occur in the bridge have been found to influence
fatigue life. Further, midpoint deflection in the longest span, its variation with
loading history and its influence on fatigue life has been analyzed and found to
match satisfactorily with mathematical results and the same process is applied
on various length of longer span with the concrete variation to develop a
mathematical model for determination of fatigue life.
Bridges are very important structure for development of transport
system. One of the type of bridge that are getting in demand is integral bridge.
Integral bridges are Integral bridge is the structure that can be constructed easy
and rapid. Further, these types of bridges are economical in comparison to
other type. These types of structure that carries moving vehicle loads of heavy
weights and this heavy moving load cause severe effect on structure and
results in the permanent failure. This traffic condition is getting adverse in
upcoming years due to increasing population and number of vehicles and result
in the pre-mature failure of bridge. One of the reason for failure is introduction
of Fatigue in the parts of structure due to vehicular load. Fatigue is very
common reason behind the failure of such structure due to variable loading.
There is no proper method of fatigue assessment in the bridges, but finite
element based study can be reliable for Fatigue behavior simulation because
in the actual structure is will take very long time, almost decays of structure.

In this paper, analytical process will be adopted, using finite element


based modeling software of an existing bridge, and adverse case that can
occurs will be applied. These loads of moving vehicle are applied for very short
time, so termed as transient loading.
Transient loading applied for very short period of time, as per as
requirement for most possible sever condition that can occur on integral bridge.
Further, Fatigue life is calculated by extraction data from FEM model .and this
result is compared with the existing mathematical formula. Moreover, The
factors over which the fatigue life depends are also required to mark out, and
their significance over fatigue life.
Further, this approach is applied on various length of bridges and
behavior of fatigue life due to increase in the length has been studied.
CHAPTER 1
INTERODUCTION
1.1 General
Integral bridges in the simplest term can be classified as bridges that are
constructed without joints between pier and deck. In Integral bridges, the
monolithic connection is established between the superstructure (deck and
girder) and the substructure (piers and abutments). Starting from one abutment
these bridges are constructed without joints to another abutment. They do not
have any joints between other intermediate pier.
In Integral bridges the bearings are removed to eliminate the problems
associated with the installation, maintenance and replacement of bearings,
some time they are very costlier and becomes un-economical to repair further.
joint less bridges that are used to avoid and eliminate the characteristic
problems related with installing, maintaining, and repairing deck joints and
bearings. .
Transient loading can be defined as loads and forces that occurs and
varies over a short time interval. A transient load may have referred to any load
that will not remain on the bridge forever. Mostly, these loads include vehicular
live loads and their tributary effects including dynamic load allowance, braking
force, centrifugal force (caused in curved section only), and live load surcharge.
Additionally, there also exist pedestrian live loads, force effects due to uniform
temperature, and gradient of temperature, force effects because of settlement
of piers, river water force and pressure due to water stream on piers, wind loads
on structure, wind on live load, friction forces that are generated between
vehicle and deck pavement, ice loads in some areas, vehicular collision forces
occurs during accidents, vessel collision forces, and earthquake loads.
For most ordinary bridges case, there are a few transient loads that are
likely to be considered. That are live loads of vehicle and their subsequently
effects including braking force, centrifugal force, and dynamic load allowance
are the most vital to consider. These subsequently effects shall always be
collective considered with the gravity effects of live loads. For this study ,only
the vehicular load is provided according to Indian standard IRC-6:2014 and the
permanent load that includes material load of bridge structural components and
nonstructural components, load of material used in wearing coat of deck
surfaces that is laid over deck are considered ,For simplicity down drag forces,
horizontal earth pressure loads, vertical pressure due to dead load of earth fill,
earth surcharge load, force effects due to creep ,shrinkage, secondary forces
that are generated from post-tensioning of members, and other forces that are
introduced due to construction process are not taken in to consideration..
Due to above provided transient loading the bridge deck deflect and
expend and other parts of bridge also shows such tendency of deflection and
expansion. This deflection and expansion will create on the deck and girder that
are fixed in to the piers. The girder in this transient case shows a behavior as a
fixed beam have (Dicleli and Erhan, 2011; Wagle and Watt ,2011). As in the
fixed beam a large amount of deformation occurs at the mid of span and this
deformation results in the plastic deformation of beam (Kalayci, et al,. 2011).
Similar case will occur in the integral bridge, But under different type of
geometrical consideration like bridge length, span or various another thing.
depending upon these, the bridges may show different types of mechanical
responses (Baptiste et al.2011).

1.2 Objective
The fatigue study will be performed using finite element modeling and its and
it is applied on various length of bridge. To access the fatigue life of the
following objectives are adopted
• To make an effort for the analysis fatigue life of an integral bridge
subjected to transient loads using ANSYS 17.1.

• To assess the influence (importance) of total length and maximum


span of bridge on the fatigue life estimation of the integral bridge.

• To determine the maximum deflection, its location in the length of the


bridge, its variation with loading history and its influence on fatigue life.

• To validate the assessed fatigue life by comparing with formula from


existing literature.
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Integral bridges are widely known for bearing less bridges because In Integral
bridges the bearings are removed to eliminate the problems associated with the
installation, maintenance and replacement of bearings, some time they are very
costlier and becomes un-economical to repair further. joint less bridges that are
used to avoid and eliminate the characteristic problems related with installing,
maintaining, and repairing deck joints and bearings.

2.1 INTEGRAL BRIDGES


In the field of bridge engineering, the concept of integral bridge is adequately
depending upon the rigidity that is provided due to monolithic connection
between sub structure of bridge and with the super structure of bridge. The
motion response generated due to ground as in earthquake is transferred from
pile to its component. The stress generated is not only transferred to pier but
also transferred to bridge super structure because of the rigidity between the
substructure component and superstructure components. When The
earthquake forces are main cause to failure, in bridges the motion generated
due to this force will adequately beard by the integral bridge in comparison to
other bridges with bearing.
Thus, conclusion can be made that, the integral bridges are less
expensive, having improved durability and easy to design than other bridge.

2.1.1 COMPLICATIONS WITH THE BEARING AND EXPANSION JOINTS


In the most of the cases of bearing and expansion joints may leak and the
provides a barrier for the surface water to go down, but it held at the deck and
cause damage due to accumulation of water. In case of the repeated load of
vehicle and continuous dead load may create the expansion. This Impact
loadings will increase in case of heavy loaded commercial vehicles, these
heavily loaded commercial vehicle will create the adverse effect on the bridge
substructure and superstructure.
Due to result of repeated loading the elastomeric bearings or other type
of bearing may break, slip or fails due to generated movement, or slip out of
original out position provided during construction. Mostly bearing are provided
in pier head and main girder. Thus the bearing fails. This failure in the function
of bearings can lead to unanticipated damage in structural components like
joints so as failure of bridge.

2.1.2 INTEGRAL ABUTMENT BRIDGES


In the integral abutment bridges shortly pronounced as IAB may be defined as
bridge in which abutment is monolithically constructed with the bridge deck and
pier. Because of monothecal construction, the expansion and construction of
movement joint eliminated.

2.1.3 BENEFITS OF INTEGRAL ABUTMENTS BRIDGES (IAB)


Integral bridges are simple in design, having less construction joints. It shows
an excellent resistance to pressure. In integral abutment bridge, embankment
can be constructed easily and rapidly. It requires no cofferdams and no battered
piles. Only Vertical piles are required. It requires only few construction joints,
because of removal of bearing element, it reduced the work of removal of
existing elements.
The construction costs and future maintenance costs is reduced for
these bridges and it provides the improved quality of riding for riders. Moreover.

2.1.4 CONSIDERATIONS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION


For the construction of integral bridge the geometrical consideration like length
of structure, type of super structure, abutment, foundation and the subsoil
condition are to be considered.
Some climatic condition like temperature, rainfall, moisture and the load
causing by snow, water and the wind are also need to be considered in few
areas
The economic considerations for these types of bridges are vital
because they are more economical than other type of bridges of same class
because they need less maintenance cost for future repairing and maintaining
and because there is no requirement of bearing, so it reduced drastically.
2.1.5 RECOMMENDEDATION FOR IMPROVEMENT OF QUALITY FOR
INTEGRAL BRIDGES
According to the requirement of bridges to fulfill the requirement of public there
is need to practice for the requirement and the raised requirement for the design
period of bridge. In some of the cases the bridge requires the approach slab it
should be constructed as per as requirement. the evolvement of public, design
people and the consultation with the geotechnical are require to exchange the
information.

2.1.6 BENEFITS OF INTEGRAL BRIDGES OVER CONVENTIONAL TYPES


OF BRIDGES
Conventional bridges required bearing between sub structure and super
structure, these bridges are not constructed monolithically as they have
separate sub structure and super structure. Conventional bridges have
relatively high construction and maintenance cost, slower construction, less
comfortable for riders because it has freely moveable vertical slabs in piers.
Due to the leakage of water to the bearing the bearing and different warts erode.
In Integral abutment bridges the construction is simple, rapid and
economical. These types of bridges add redundancy for seismic performance
due to construction of integrated abutment .in compare to conventional bridge
it eliminated the leakage of water on the critical elements. integral bridges have
improved riding comfort.
Integral bridges getting popular due to above merits but there are more
aspects required to be analyzed and explored for further before construction in
various consideration and loading.
2.2 Fatigue
At the initial stage, many parts may work well as per as their requirement buy
they often fail to fulfill their requirement in service. The 50% to 90% of this failure
is classified as fatigue failure. This Fatigue failure caused by repeated cyclic
loading on parts. To find out the capability of a material to withstand in repeated
loading fatigue analysis, it is required to carry out the fatigue analysis.
There are three methods of analyzing the fatigue life
• Strain Life
• Stress Life, and
• Fracture Mechanics;
In ANSYS 17.1 Fatigue Module, only strain life and stress life methods are
available.
At present, the approach of Strain Life is commonly used. Strain life
mainly deals with the occurrence of less number of fatigue cycle so termed as
low-cycle fatigue, by using this approach the fatigue life can be predicted to
acceptable limit. The strain life based approach is based on crack initiation.
Whereas the stress life is depending upon the total life and have nothing
to do with the crack initiation so it deals with the high number of cyclic loads
before failure so it results in high cycle fatigue.
Low cycle fatigue refers to less than 105 cycles and high cycle fatigue
refers more than this.

Table No. 1 Comparison between stress life and strain life approach
S.N. Strain life Stress life
1 Strain Life is excellent for Stress life is widely used for the
characterizing for low cycle high cycle fatigue.
fatigue
2 Strain life is concerned with Stress life is based on total life not
the initiation of crack and its with the crack propagation and
propagation up to failure initiation.
3 Strains typically deals with low Used only for High cycle fatigue
number of cycle, therefore it
addressed result for low cycle
fatigue, but also work fine with
high cycle fatigue.

Third fatigue criteria is fracture mechanics, it is based on the crack generation


and it’s propagation up to Sevier effect and complete time taken to grow this
crack up to critical condition is find out and this time taken is called fatigue life.
The concept of Fatigue and fracture mechanics is purely based on
empirical theory and formula, though it allows for prediction of life and design
pledge, life prediction or optimization of design may be improved using Fracture
mechanics. Fatigue of materials in fracture mechanics may be defined as
having following four phases.
1. Crack nucleation,
2. Stage I crack-growth,
3. Stage II crack-growth,
4. Ultimate ductile failure.

2.2.1 TYPES OF CYCLIC LOAD


Fatigue damage will occur due to the continuous change in the load at the point
of application. Due to this change in load, from single stress calculation we
cannot come to any result so multiple state of stress are required to be
determined. These cyclic loading are sometimes termed as fatigue loading
And there are following types fatigue loading:
• Proportional loading of constant amplitude,
• Non-proportional loading of constant amplitude,
• Proportional loading of non-constant amplitude,
• Non-proportional loading of Non-constant amplitude,
In ANSYS 17.1, for stress type fatigue life calculation, only first three are
available Proportional loading of constant amplitude, non-proportional loading
of constant amplitude and Proportional loading of Non-constant amplitude.
Proportional loading of Non-constant amplitude is in beta phase that is
still needs to be verified and Non-proportional loading of non-constant loading
is not available in ANSYS 17.1
Whereas for Strain type life determination only above two are available,
for non-constant amplitude, proportional and non-proportional loading, fatigue
life cannot be calculated.
proportional loading of Constant amplitude,
it is the classical approach, the loading varies in a fixed manner for lowest to
the highest values, in a fixed time cycle. It is required to define loading ratio.
The loading ratio is a ratio of the second load to the first load (LR = L2/L1).
In this type of loading, the loading provided is in a proportion because of

only one
Fig 1 Proportional loading of constant amplitude
Only one pair of finite element result are required and axes of principal stress
remain unchanged for entire process. In the fully reversed type of loading the
load is applied then equal amount of load is applied in then equal and opposite
load is applied. In this case load ratio is -1 because load is applied and removed
in each cycle .

Constant Amplitude, Non-Proportional Loading


For these types of cyclic loading the maximum and minimum range of load is
fixed ,but the occurrences will change so the time for applying load in one
direction is not same as the above direction.

Fig 2 Non-Constant Amplitude load


Non-constant amplitude, proportional loading
In this type of cyclic loading the amplitude is not fixed and it changes cut the
cyclic time taken will remain constant over the entire process. In this type of
cycle the maximum damage caused can not be seen and do not provide the
optimum result.

Fig.3 Non-constant Amplitude load


For Stress Life, there is another option available Though, in loading of non-
constant amplitude, some cycles may be obtainable with very small alternating
stresses. In order to control this, the infinite life value or the endurance limit is
need to be defined that will be required in where the alternate stress goes
beyond limit of S-N curve..

Fig.4 Non-Constant Amplitude load

2.2.2 Mean Stress Correction


Loading applied in the FEM based models are on up to mark of having
maximum optimum output but in real case this type of loading will occur in
rare condition. So the result also varied form actual result. To eliminate these
type of modeling error ,mean stress correction is applied to make the result
closer to actual loading in real condition.
Strain Life
In finite element modeling, strain life is calculated by given formula it includes
total strain life which comprises of elastic strain and plastic strain, total
response is calculated

  f
 (2 N )b   (2 N )c
2 E f f f
where,

 Total strain Amplitude
2
  2  the stress amplitude
E  Modulus of elasticity
N  Number of cycle to failure
f
2N  Nimber of reversals to failure
f

Number(2001) present the excellent equation to find out the role of local stress
and strain at a certain location as reported below
Neuber’s equation
  K t2 eS (2)
  Local (total ) starin
  Local Stress
K  Elastic stress Concentration factor
t
e  No min al Elastic Strain
S  No min al Elastic stress
Thus by solving Eqs (1) and (2) simultaneously, local stress and strain can be
calculated for given elastic inputs. Both the above equation will generate a
nonlinear equation and are required to be solved by iterative method.
Stephens and Fatemi 2001

this paper show that the fatigue occur due to progressive enlargement of flaw
in material that will become the reason beg=hind the failure caused by
repeating loads.

Baptiste et al,. 2011; Dicleli and Erhan 2011; Wagle and Watt 2011; Kalayci
et al,. 2011

There is very complex mechanism that is required to be understand the fatigue


failure. There are two types of fatigue failure first low cycle fatigue caused by
low number of cycles and high cycle fatigue caused by high number of repeated
cyclic loads.

Arsoy 2000; Hallmark 2000; Dicleli et al,. 2003

This paper is based on the application of cyclic loads of random nature that
differs from the actual condition that a structure suffers ,these applied load are
need to modeled mathematically for the computation of fatigue life. These
mathematical models are based on the provided historical loading and historical
behavior.

Basquin (1910)

Basquin proposed a excellent formula for fatigue life as a function of stress


strength

 a   f , (2 N f )b

where
 a  amplitude of stress;
 f ,  coeffcient of fatigue strength,
N f  number of cycles before failure, and
b  exponentof fatigue strength
Coffin 1954; Manson 1965

For integral bridge that is subjected to cyclic loading, the strain can be defined
in terms of length of bridge. If plastic deformations are only considered the the
fatigue cycle can be find using Coffin-Manson formula that is stated as below


  ,f (2 N f )c
2

where
 = plastic-strain amplitude,
 ,f = fatigue ductility coefficient, and
c = fatigue ductility exponent.

Kilinski et al,. 1991; Mander et al,. 1994

If total strain is considered for the finding of number of cycles by considering


total strain, Coffin-Manson is used along with Basquin as stated below as
described in the paper of Kilinski (Kilinski et al,. 1991)

 t  f
'

 (2 N f )b   'f (2 N f )c
2 E

where
 t  total strain amplitude,
 'f  fatigue strength coefficient,
 'f  fatigue ductility coefficient,
E  Young's modulus,
N f  number of cycles to failure, and
b and c = damage model constants.
The above equation is very useful and it shows good relationship with
experimental result
The equivalent stress is calculated from stress using von-mises approach and
termed as von-mises stress  eq , and it can be computed from:

1
 eq   ( xx   yy )2  ( yy   zz ) 2  ( xx   zz ) 2  6( yz2   xz2   xy2 )
2

Where,
 xx ,  yy and  zz are normal-stress;
 xy , xz and  xy are shear stress.

The von-Mises stress or effective equivalent stress  eq ,may be represented in

the following term by using principal stresses.

1
 eq   ( 1   2 )2  ( 2   3 ) 2  ( 1   3 ) 2
2

Where,
 1 ,  2 and  3 principal stresses.
when the von-Mises or equivalent stress  eq value becomes equal to the value

of critical stress, the material will starts yielding and deform plastically and so
this stress is termed as yield stress.
But in concrete, due to cyclic loading the material fails before yielding,

1 3
 eq   ( xx   yy )2  ( zz   xx )2  ( xx   zz ) 2  ( xy2   yz2   xz2 )
2(1   ) 2

Where,all the indication are in there usual form .


Simarlily, the above equation of equivalent strain represented in terms
of principal strain as below

1
 eq   (1   2 ) 2  ( 3  1 ) 2  ( 2   3 ) 2
2(1   )

Where
1 ,  2 , and  3 are principal strains
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
In every bridge, there is requirement of designing it for carrying cyclic
loading. This cyclin loading it is going to wear for the entire life span. It has been
seen that the material will fails before the yielding due to repeated loading

So on the basis of their failure it is classified in two form, namely high


cycle fatigue and low cycle fatigue. The mechanism causing the cycle failure is
difficult of model mathematically (Baptiste et al,. 2011; Dicleweli and Erhan
2011; Wawgle and Watt 2011; Kalayci et al,. 2011).

Complex structures like bridges are constructed by many different materials;


therefore, it is not straight forward to determine their effective properties,
moreover, there is requirement of complex numerical modeling for
understanding its behavior.

In this project a finite element based , numerical modeling is done using


ANSYS 17.1, For which following steps are performed

Steps for Fatigue-Life Analysis Procedure

1. Design Consideration of exiting integral bridge:


(Kalkaji Flyover, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi, Delhi)
2. Selection of Software used For Fatigue Analysis: ANSYS 17.1
3. Generating a Software based Model
4. Applying the transient Loads using (IRC:6-2014 70-R )
5. Perform Analysis
6. Finding out the stress and strain from the numerical model
7. Validation of result obtained from Software with mathematical
approach.
8. Determine fatigue life of Integral Bridge
DESIGN CAPTURE

For analysis, It is required to consider the geometry and material property for
existing structure. This data collection is required for constructing a software
based finite-element (FE) model. For general consideration, a widely adoptable
range of design criteria is used in this paper. In this paper, after the analysis,
the properties like different grade of concrete , different span of bridge and
different web thickness of girder are considered and analyzed further.

For design consideration, there is requirement of choosing a bridge one


which is simply to construct and currently exists. Kalkaji Flyover at Okhla
Industrial Area, New Delhi is one of them. Kalkaji Flyover is 150m integral
flyover that has been constructed at the vital T-junction on Ring Road near
Kalkaji Temple. It has typically five continuous span and deck of (25m + 30m +
40m + 30m + 25m) between piers, and it has an voided reinforced concrete
slab deck of depth 1.70m that is hunched and increased to 2.20m at the piers
for supporting the 40.0m obligatory main span. In this paper soil properties are
not considered and piles are assumed to be fixed.

The difference between Flyover and bridge is completely based on


the it’s purpose of construction or usage and its construction location
where it is built.

Bridges are generally constructed over valley, rivers, sea or any


other water bodies that separates two points on ground and its length
depends upon the distance between these two points in ground. Usually
bridges are constructed for trains, buses, cars, motorcycle, cycle and
pedestrians.

Whereas, Flyover is constructed between two or more points that


are separated by accessible route in the ground. Flyover are constructed
over junctions, roads, streets, railway lines etc. for road traffic.
Bridge Model Dimensions

Fig 5 Integral bridge

Integral RC Bridge is modeled of total span of 156 m. Bridge is divided into five
spans of 25m, 30m, 40m, 30m and 25m and 6 piers of 1m width and the height
of bridge is taken as 10 m. Figure shown below shows the length of bridge.

Table 2 Dimensions

Overall Length of bridge 156m


Height 6m
Width of bridge 7.5057 m
MATERIAL PROPERTIES

For the modeled geometry there is requirement of assigning the property .of
material .The material property that are taken are tabulated below

Table 3 Material Properties


S.n. Material Density(Kg/m3) Modulus of elasticity(MPa)
1 Reinforced concrete 2500 50000
2 Steel fe415 7850 200000

LOAD APPLICATION

To study the fatigue in an integral bridge deck that is subjected to transient


loading, the load is to be determined. There are various loads that are required
to be considered for the purpose of computation of stresses, wherever they are
applicable, some type of loading that is subjected in a bridge are:
• Dead load
• Live load
• Longitudinal force
• Impact load
• Thermal force
• Frictional resistance of expansion bearings
• Erection forces
• Wind load
• Seismic load
• Racking force
• Forces due to curvature.
• Forces on parapets

In this paper, dead load is taken as the load of bridge model, Live load
according to IRC standard. Further, Impact forces, thermal forces,
frictional resistance of expansion bearings, erection forces, wind load,
seismic load, racking force, force due to curvature and forces due to
parapets are not considered. For live load, standard load case that is
provided by Indian Road Congress (IRC:6-2014) is considered.
Environmental conditions are kept fixed to normal of 34° C in the
modeling of FE model. Thermal expansion and contraction is not
considered and other climate factor like wind loading snow loading etc. are
also neglected.

IRC:6-2014 recommendation that are considered for load analysis.


The Indian Road Congress (IRC) specifies three types of design loads, being
70-R loading, Class A loading, Class B loading and class AA. Details of 70-R
loading are shown in Figure Below.

Fig 6 IS 2014 70R loading

For the clear distance of 7.5 m between curb a simplified method was
established for slab-on-girder bridges, in order to get the width of each lane of
3.75m. In modeling of bridge the lane width was taken as 3.75 m ,resulting in a
total bridge width of 7.5 m.
The bridges is analyzed for 70-R and Class A loadings by the orthotropic
plate method of Cusens and Pama (1975), which is unified into computer
program ANSYS.
Combination of Live load
There is following consideration that are required for loading of 7.5 m wide deck.
Table 3 : Combinations of loads for designing

S.N Carriageway width lanes Load combination

1 From 9.6m to 13.1m 3 One lane of 70R


For every two lane of class A
loading

Development of the Numerical Model

To develop finite element based mathematical model designed is captured from


and modeled in the software and material properties are assigned. The FEM
model is able to capture every dates that area required for the computation of
result .result varies on the basis of degree of details that are included in the
designing of bridge. If less details are provided in the modeling then the values
are calculated in less number of iteration and for a good degree of model the
result can be verified with the experimental model as per expected limit.

In this study ,The 3D model of substructure components like pier and


superstructure component like main grader cross grader deck parapet wall is
designed as shown in below model of integral bridge.
Fig 7 Model developed in ANSYS 17.1

Meshing

One of the main component that is required for the analysis is meshing.
The mesh chosen depends on the various factors like material property, design
geometry, applied loading and so on.

As stated previously, for study an integral bridge of 156.2 meters long and
having 6 piers of 1m thick are taken. Further, length of long mid span is varied
to 45m, 50m, 55m, 60m, 65m and 70m. The deck is fabricated over 4 main
girder.

Extraction of Stress and Strain History from Finite-Element Model

Finite element modeling is done using ANSYS 17.1. because of the material
faces all three axes stress so there are requirement of determining creteria like
von-Mises (1996) or Tresca (1864).In order to determine the state of stress and
subsequent deformation, weather that is elastic or plastic.

Fatigue-Damage Model

The model is designed using software and the result are compared with use
some formula .
This paper is based on the application of cyclic loads of random nature that
differs from the actual condition that a structure suffers ,these applied load are
need to modeled mathematically for the computation of fatigue life. These
mathematical models are based on the provided historical loading and historical
behavior.

Basquin proposed a excellent formula for fatigue life as a function of stress


strength

 a   f , (2 N f )b

where
 a  amplitude of stress;
 f ,  coeffcient of fatigue strength,
N f  number of cycles before failure, and
b  exponentof fatigue strength

For integral bridge that is subjected to cyclic loading, the strain can be defined
in terms of length of bridge. If plastic deformations are only considered the the
fatigue cycle can be find using Coffin-Manson formula that is stated as below


  ,f (2 N f )c
2

where
 = plastic-strain amplitude,
 ,f = fatigue ductility coefficient, and
c = fatigue ductility exponent.

If total strain is considered for the finding of number of cycles by considering


total strain, Coffin-Manson is used along with Basquin as stated below as
described in the paper of Kilinski (Kilinski et al,. 1991)

:
 t  f
'

 (2 N f )b   'f (2 N f )c
2 E

where
 t  total strain amplitude,
 'f  fatigue strength coefficient,
 'f  fatigue ductility coefficient,
E  Young's modulus,
N f  number of cycles to failure, and
b and c = damage model constants.

The above equation is very useful and it shows good relationship with
experimental result
1
 eq   ( a1   a 2 ) 2  ( a 3   a1 ) 2  ( a 2   a 3 ) 2
2(1   )

Where  a1 ,  a 2 and  a3 = principal-strain amplitudes

Further, the equivalent strain amplitude  eq extracted from the FE model

is used in  a  0.0795(2 N f )0.448 in order to find out the total number of cycles

before failure.
Chapter 4
Analysis of bridge model
Fatigue Life
For analysis, It is required to consider the geometry and material property for
existing structure. This data collection is required for constructing a software
based finite-element (FE) model. For general consideration, a widely adoptable
range of design criteria is used in this paper. In this paper, after the analysis,
the properties like different grade of concrete , different span of bridge and
different web thickness of girder are considered and analyzed further.

Fig 8 Top of deck where loading is provided


Design Capture
As shown in figure. Bridge consist of a
0.24 m concrete slab that is supported by
4 rectangular girders of 1.8mX0.67m.

Table 4 Model dimensions and


properties
Length X 156.2 m 156. m
Length Y 1.0122 m 1. m

Properties
Volume 117.04 m³ 38.349 m³ 38.347 m³
Mass 9.188e+005 kg 3.0104e+005 kg 3.0102e+005 kg
Centroid X 78. m
Centroid Y -0.9061 m 0.34495 m
Centroid Z 4.6739 m 6.5239 m 7.3472 m 0.15284 m
Moment of Inertia Ip1 1.2041e+005 kg·m² 28444 kg·m²
Moment of Inertia Ip2 1.8681e+009 kg·m² 6.169e+008 kg·m²
Moment of Inertia Ip3 1.8682e+009 kg·m² 6.1692e+008 kg·m²
Statistics
Nodes 536 716 738
Elements 44 84 105
Mesh Metric None
Fig 9 Meshed Isometric view

Finite-Element Modeling of Superstructure and Substructure


Numerical model is prepared by using ANSYS 17.1. and this numerical model
is meshed with considering quadratic element. There are 102147 numbers of
nodes and 35662 meshed elements.

Fig 10 Meshed top surface

According to IRC-2014, loading is considered as per as 70R load of tracked


vehicle or wheeled vehicle. A design load for wheeled vehicle load as per as
IRC recommendation is used in this analysis. two design vehicles are placed in
each lane of the bridge to maximize the moment on the piles. A large number
of field investigation comprises of such loading of IABs Kim and Laman (2012)
Therefore, effect of live vehicle load is considered positive impact on the fatigue
life (Fleck et al,. 1985)

Analysis procedure

For analyzing the fatigue performance of integral RC bridge, two vehicle of 100
ton moves from one end to other in both lanes. These types of small bridges
are usually constructed for city traffic so they travel between 40 km/h to 60
km/h. so as per above speed consideration of 40 km/h, To travel this 156 m
distance both vehicle will take 14.01s.

Reaction at supports
Maximum, minimum and resultant reactions are extracted from the model in
each of six supports.

Fig 10 loading and Supports of Bridges

Force Reaction at support 1


Table 5 : Reaction at support 1
Time [s] Force Reaction Force Reaction Force Force Reaction
(X) [N] (Y) [N] Reaction (Total) [N]
(Z) [N]
0.50143 -8.907e+005 1.5246e+006 -265.27 1.7657e+006
1.0029 -1.0447e+006 1.1133e+006 -155.66 1.5267e+006
1.5043 -7.8452e+005 6.0739e+005 -313.59 9.9216e+005
2.0057 -3.7302e+005 2.405e+005 17.434 4.4383e+005
2.5071 19819 4558.4 -115.41 20337
3.0086 2.0635e+005 -74651 138.77 2.1944e+005
3.51 2.0835e+005 -1.0137e+005 -205.57 2.317e+005
4.0114 85001 -62168 135.53 1.0531e+005
4.5129 -11659 -33261 62.415 35245
5.0143 -17357 -2540.6 223.49 17543
5.5157 70577 -8924.5 -145.09 71140
6.0171 1.1813e+005 -5050.6 -47.262 1.1824e+005
6.5186 91076 -3371. -197.72 91139
7.02 25381 8484.8 -60.06 26762
7.5214 -40984 12537 -126.29 42859
8.0229 -82498 17035 -12.071 84238
8.5243 -52193 8393.8 -55.528 52864
9.0257 22533 -2747.7 15.704 22700
9.5271 62399 -9871.3 -24.696 63175
10.029 39741 -6211.5 18.314 40224
10.53 -11602 944.14 3.9046 11641
11.031 -39485 5443.7 29.42 39859
11.533 -14592 1957.6 1.7359 14723
12.034 33770 -4786.2 -5.4506 34108
12.536 42471 -6044.7 -15.403 42899
13.037 3435.2 -454.22 3.4038 3465.1
13.539 -29635 4267. 10.331 29940
14.04 -20150 2883.1 7.378 20355
Force Reaction (X)
2000000 Force Reaction (Y)
1800000 Force Reaction (Z)
1600000 Force Reaction (Total)
1400000
1200000
1000000
Force Reaction (N)

800000
600000
400000
200000
0
-200000
-400000
-600000
-800000
-1000000
-1200000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time [s] (s)

Fig 11 Force Reaction at support 1


Force reaction at support on is maximum in Y axis which is vertically downward,
This is due the vehicles are approaching towards bridge and reaction is
captures at support 1, which is the first support of bridge.

Force reaction at support 2


Table 6 Force reaction at support 2
Time [s] Force Reaction Force Reaction Force Force Reaction
2 (X) [N] 2 (Y) [N] Reaction 2 2 (Total) [N]
(Z) [N]
0.50143 6.7454e+005 3.7797e+005 450.6 7.7321e+005
1.0029 1.1484e+006 9.1353e+005 222.73 1.4674e+006
1.5043 1.2155e+006 1.4175e+006 266.47 1.8672e+006
2.0057 7.0359e+005 1.7746e+006 160.94 1.909e+006
2.5071 -2.9168e+005 1.8576e+006 -120.67 1.8804e+006
3.0086 -1.0922e+006 1.6972e+006 -188.94 2.0182e+006
3.51 -1.4089e+006 1.317e+006 -8.6825 1.9286e+006
4.0114 -1.2264e+006 8.6102e+005 -86.268 1.4985e+006
4.5129 -7.9808e+005 4.157e+005 -346.3 8.9986e+005
5.0143 -2.3391e+005 1.1053e+005 -194.73 2.5871e+005
5.5157 2.318e+005 -53987 147.54 2.3801e+005
6.0171 4.7071e+005 -1.1709e+005 234.39 4.8505e+005
6.5186 4.5962e+005 -1.4619e+005 177.64 4.8231e+005
7.02 3.1594e+005 -1.3166e+005 231.87 3.4227e+005
7.5214 1.1143e+005 -97232 238.9 1.4789e+005
8.0229 -51090 -52742 285.59 73431
8.5243 -63605 -18985 166.18 66378
9.0257 44780 -429.73 20.462 44782
9.5271 1.0621e+005 6827.7 -64.533 1.0643e+005
10.029 59138 8514.8 -55.537 59748
10.53 -36816 7492.3 -79.454 37571
11.031 -84563 4034.2 -74.842 84660
11.533 -30312 1390.8 -41.835 30344
12.034 66103 -971.34 23.336 66110
12.536 83804 -938.73 27.242 83809
13.037 7214.5 -783.61 8.9394 7256.9
13.539 -57435 265.17 -9.0349 57436
14.04 -39344 65.655 -2.8557 39344
Force Reaction 2 (X)
Force Reaction 2 (Y)
2000000 Force Reaction 2 (Z)
Force Reaction 2 (Total)
1500000

1000000
Force Reaction (N)

500000

-500000

-1000000

-1500000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time [s] (s)

Fig 12 Force reaction at support 2


Force Reaction at support 3
Table 7 Force reaction at support 3
Time [s] Force Reaction Force Reaction Force Force Reaction
3 (X) [N] 3 (Y) [N] Reaction 3 3 (Total) [N]
(Z) [N]
0.50143 50210 -21248 -224.4 54521
1.0029 -1.0676e+005 -58100 -90.582 1.2155e+005
1.5043 -2.4675e+005 -73417 -102.21 2.5744e+005
2.0057 -1.6649e+005 -41845 -121.19 1.7167e+005
2.5071 2.0055e+005 88915 233.44 2.1938e+005
3.0086 7.3246e+005 3.6652e+005 356.99 8.1904e+005
3.51 1.2093e+006 7.746e+005 277.6 1.4361e+006
4.0114 1.4407e+006 1.2266e+006 211.53 1.8922e+006
4.5129 1.1964e+006 1.6181e+006 343.25 2.0123e+006
5.0143 3.6941e+005 1.858e+006 152.24 1.8943e+006
5.5157 -7.6725e+005 1.8987e+006 -78.39 2.0478e+006
6.0171 -1.5737e+006 1.7542e+006 -53.659 2.3566e+006
6.5186 -1.8287e+006 1.4726e+006 31.14 2.3479e+006
7.02 -1.7165e+006 1.1067e+006 -97.764 2.0424e+006
7.5214 -1.3547e+006 7.1906e+005 -284.31 1.5337e+006
8.0229 -8.6695e+005 3.678e+005 -436.82 9.4174e+005
8.5243 -3.583e+005 1.2558e+005 -283.33 3.7967e+005
9.0257 45776 1763.3 56.772 45810
9.5271 2.2495e+005 -43636 170.85 2.2915e+005
10.029 1.9922e+005 -56664 113.78 2.0712e+005
10.53 65280 -45680 124.3 79675
11.031 -35655 -26536 187.51 44446
11.533 -18843 -6604.4 106.13 19967
12.034 65981 3954.4 -24.146 66100
12.536 80207 6778. -44.63 80493
13.037 -2618.5 4406. -11.27 5125.4
13.539 -67580 659.01 -32.091 67583
14.04 -43985 -543.19 -33.34 43989

Force Reaction 3 (X)


Force Reaction 3 (Y)
Force Reaction 3 (Z)
2500000
Force Reaction 3 (Total)
2000000

1500000

1000000
Force Reaction (N)

500000

-500000

-1000000

-1500000

-2000000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)

Fig 13 Force reaction at support 3

Force Reaction at support 4


Table 8 Force Reaction at support 4
Time [s] Force Reaction Force Reaction Force Force Reaction
4 (X) [N] 4 (Y) [N] Reaction 4 4 (Total) [N]
(Z) [N]
0.50143 71696 472.2 41.851 71697
1.0029 10637 4351. 77.949 11493
1.5043 -75990 6434.5 125.66 76262
2.0057 -61114 4103. 59.639 61252
2.5071 17441 -6834.1 -134.63 18732
3.0086 38873 -25938 -315.3 46733
3.51 -66219 -46022 -299.72 80642
4.0114 -1.9616e+005 -56005 -277.06 2.0399e+005
4.5129 -2.2722e+005 -44562 -240.34 2.3154e+005
5.0143 -44790 2808. -91.333 44878
5.5157 3.5556e+005 1.2681e+005 128.79 3.775e+005
6.0171 8.7081e+005 3.7174e+005 140.53 9.4683e+005
6.5186 1.3611e+006 7.2299e+005 100.53 1.5412e+006
7.02 1.7314e+006 1.1112e+006 207.19 2.0573e+006
7.5214 1.8457e+006 1.4769e+006 385.35 2.3638e+006
8.0229 1.5975e+006 1.757e+006 538.21 2.3746e+006
8.5243 7.8297e+005 1.9015e+006 317.04 2.0564e+006
9.0257 -3.6191e+005 1.8583e+006 -236.89 1.8932e+006
9.5271 -1.1981e+006 1.6213e+006 -469.99 2.016e+006
10.029 -1.4428e+006 1.229e+006 -328.45 1.8953e+006
10.53 -1.2138e+006 7.7831e+005 -292.61 1.4419e+006
11.031 -7.348e+005 3.687e+005 -354.15 8.2212e+005
11.533 -2.0266e+005 90164 -177.35 2.2181e+005
12.034 1.7109e+005 -41752 14.223 1.7611e+005
12.536 2.5562e+005 -74316 -112.95 2.662e+005
13.037 1.1756e+005 -58764 -280.64 1.3143e+005
13.539 -42481 -22441 57.309 48044
14.04 -54994 -789.84 251.27 55000
Force Reaction 4 (X)
Force Reaction 4 (Y)
2500000 Force Reaction 4 (Z)
Force Reaction 4 (Total)
2000000

1500000
Force Reaction (N)

1000000

500000

-500000

-1000000

-1500000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)

Fig 14 Force Reaction at support 4


Force Reaction at support 5
Table 9 Force Reaction at support 5

Time [s] Force Reaction Force Reaction Force Force Reaction


5 (X) [N] 5 (Y) [N] Reaction 5 5 (Total) [N]
(Z) [N]
0.50143 61131 177.29 4.6434 61131
1.0029 243.38 -536.86 -40.604 590.85
1.5043 -79930 -1190.5 -66. 79939
2.0057 -61485 -735.47 -48.069 61489
2.5071 28817 1135.5 59.054 28839
3.0086 87125 4329.6 142.97 87233
3.51 36115 7276.3 173.04 36841
4.0114 -56237 8637.6 141.65 56896
4.5129 -1.069e+005 6707.6 96.531 1.0712e+005
5.0143 -44924 -558.12 -15.586 44928
5.5157 55976 -19082 -184.64 59140
6.0171 43194 -53710 -311.28 68924
6.5186 -1.2296e+005 -97378 -371.78 1.5685e+005
7.02 -3.2336e+005 -1.3371e+005 -467.76 3.4991e+005
7.5214 -4.7036e+005 -1.4566e+005 -550.15 4.924e+005
8.0229 -4.752e+005 -1.1988e+005 -566.43 4.9009e+005
8.5243 -2.405e+005 -51932 -293.14 2.4605e+005
9.0257 2.3518e+005 1.0596e+005 310.53 2.5795e+005
9.5271 7.8907e+005 4.1629e+005 567.05 8.9214e+005
10.029 1.229e+006 8.5321e+005 330.29 1.4961e+006
10.53 1.3965e+006 1.318e+006 179.67 1.9203e+006
11.031 1.0997e+006 1.6898e+006 206.69 2.0161e+006
11.533 2.8233e+005 1.863e+006 80.463 1.8843e+006
12.034 -6.9737e+005 1.7732e+006 -80.213 1.9054e+006
12.536 -1.2341e+006 1.4295e+006 230.11 1.8885e+006
13.037 -1.1488e+006 9.1839e+005 653.33 1.4708e+006
13.539 -6.8418e+005 3.8649e+005 160.58 7.858e+005
14.04 -1.8954e+005 64123 -321.49 2.001e+005

Force Reaction 5 (X)


Force Reaction 5 (Y)
2000000
Force Reaction 5 (Z)
Force Reaction 5 (Total)

1500000

1000000
Force Reaction (N)

500000

-500000

-1000000

-1500000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)

Fig 15 Force Reaction at support 5


Force Reaction at support 6
Tabe 10 Force Reaction at support 6

Time [s] Force Reaction Force Reaction Force Force Reaction


6 (X) [N] 6 (Y) [N] Reaction 6 6 (Total) [N]
(Z) [N]
0.50143 31069 4492.4 -3.3769 31392
1.0029 539.07 66.242 12.961 543.28
1.5043 -40242 -5658.2 10.105 40638
2.0057 -30862 -4475.1 16.591 31184
2.5071 13486 1931.7 -14.375 13623
3.0086 40541 5438.9 -22.03 40904
3.51 11029 1075.9 -39.906 11081
4.0114 -37754 -6214.8 -26.12 38262
4.5129 -62009 -9456.1 -19.911 62726
5.0143 -22532 -3252.6 9.763 22766
5.5157 48416 8566.2 55.879 49168
6.0171 77232 15456 123.89 78764
6.5186 36148 13089 188.88 38445
7.02 -30036 6411.5 250.46 30714
7.5214 -93266 -1724.2 279.5 93283
8.0229 -1.2161e+005 -7859. 232.62 1.2187e+005
8.5243 -70529 -5988.4 98.123 70782
9.0257 15247 -6233.3 -125.38 16472
9.5271 16717 -28200 -196.46 32783
10.029 -84104 -66757 -55.849 1.0738e+005
10.53 -1.995e+005 -94727 46.333 2.2084e+005
11.031 -2.0715e+005 -81059 8.2391 2.2244e+005
11.533 -15885 10520 16.064 19053
12.034 3.6067e+005 2.2968e+005 78.903 4.2759e+005
12.536 7.7447e+005 6.0751e+005 -74.785 9.8431e+005
13.037 1.022e+006 1.1005e+006 -363.59 1.5019e+006
13.539 8.8093e+005 1.5225e+006 -175.44 1.759e+006
14.04 3.4662e+005 9.1315e+005 48.343 9.7672e+005

Force Reaction 6 (X)


Force Reaction 6 (Y)
1800000 Force Reaction 6 (Z)
Force Reaction 6 (Total)
1600000

1400000

1200000
Force Reaction (N)

1000000

800000

600000

400000

200000

-200000

-400000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)

Fig 16 Force Reaction at support 4

Moment Reaction in supports


Moment Reaction at support 1
Table 11 Moment Reaction at support 1
Time [s] Moment Moment Moment Reaction Moment Reaction
Reaction (X) Reaction (Y) (Z) [N·m] (Total) [N·m]
[N·m] [N·m]
0.50143 -4351. 4100.5 8.0623e+005 8.0625e+005
1.0029 -9617. 5822.3 1.076e+006 1.0761e+006
1.5043 -7481.8 5180.1 9.9198e+005 9.9202e+005
2.0057 -1794.5 2702.5 5.3768e+005 5.3769e+005
2.5071 -1015.2 -485.2 -92213 92219
3.0086 -243.38 -2307.3 -4.5105e+005 4.5106e+005
3.51 -1652.5 -2325.2 -3.8554e+005 3.8555e+005
4.0114 -468.26 -1161.8 -77532 77542
4.5129 -639.36 -116.05 1.4546e+005 1.4546e+005
5.0143 557.1 93.707 73550 73552
5.5157 140.72 -482.94 -2.192e+005 2.192e+005
6.0171 1020.3 -836.55 -3.8921e+005 3.8921e+005
6.5186 263.58 -619.32 -3.0928e+005 3.0928e+005
7.02 169.8 -169.02 -1.1717e+005 1.1717e+005
7.5214 -706.44 308.42 93855 93858
8.0229 -725.99 585.69 2.2631e+005 2.2631e+005
8.5243 -649.76 377.4 1.4933e+005 1.4933e+005
9.0257 245.86 -161.72 -67378 67379
9.5271 456.28 -436.79 -1.8202e+005 1.8202e+005
10.029 403.22 -288.3 -1.1501e+005 1.1501e+005
10.53 -85.406 73.567 36599 36599
11.031 -240.53 267.32 1.1805e+005 1.1806e+005
11.533 -113.58 105.27 43546 43546
12.034 273.74 -227.33 -99833 99833
12.536 323.31 -276.72 -1.257e+005 1.257e+005
13.037 51.663 9.9647e-002 -9784.2 9784.4
13.539 -208.51 224.3 87948 87949
14.04 -147.55 144.01 59808 59808

Moment Reaction (X)


Moment Reaction (Y)
1200000
Moment Reaction (Z)
Moment Reaction (Total)
1000000

800000
Moment reaction (Nm)

600000

400000

200000

-200000

-400000

-600000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)

Fig 17 Moment Reaction at support 1


Moment Reaction at support 2
Table 12 Moment Reaction at support 2
Time [s] Moment Moment Moment Moment
Reaction 2 Reaction 2 Reaction 2 (Z) Reaction 2
(X) [N·m] (Y) [N·m] [N·m] (Total) [N·m]
0.50143 3350.6 -6298.5 -9.4874e+005 9.4877e+005
1.0029 7067. -12062 -1.3514e+006 1.3514e+006
1.5043 4710.4 -10309 -1.2425e+006 1.2425e+006
2.0057 1794.4 -4378.7 -6.7898e+005 6.7899e+005
2.5071 3083.6 154.88 2.7677e+005 2.7679e+005
3.0086 6127.2 1799.8 1.0585e+006 1.0585e+006
3.51 7217.8 2791.8 1.4934e+006 1.4934e+006
4.0114 6693.5 3156.3 1.4565e+006 1.4565e+006
4.5129 5184.8 2860.7 1.0777e+006 1.0778e+006
5.0143 2323.6 1011.3 3.3295e+005 3.3296e+005
5.5157 -1166.2 -1003.9 -4.2629e+005 4.263e+005
6.0171 -3223. -2183.4 -8.3382e+005 8.3383e+005
6.5186 -3679.7 -2141.3 -7.6632e+005 7.6633e+005
7.02 -2577.6 -1549.7 -4.6679e+005 4.668e+005
7.5214 -982.33 -639.52 -76851 76860
8.0229 561.36 94.949 2.0831e+005 2.0831e+005
8.5243 699.95 227.55 1.7498e+005 1.7498e+005
9.0257 -156.31 -171.61 -98965 98965
9.5271 -633.57 -399.47 -2.4836e+005 2.4836e+005
10.029 -394.5 -215.51 -1.4722e+005 1.4722e+005
10.53 -52.131 143.71 69156 69156
11.031 94.097 320.06 1.8059e+005 1.8059e+005
11.533 -24.47 112.71 65567 65567
12.034 -224.38 -244.47 -1.4594e+005 1.4594e+005
12.536 -279.48 -310.58 -1.8445e+005 1.8445e+005
13.037 -29.704 -11.965 -14999 14999
13.539 216. 230.35 1.278e+005 1.2781e+005
14.04 161.56 154.89 87221 87221
Moment Reaction 2 (X)
Moment Reaction 2 (Y)
Moment Reaction 2 (Z)
1500000 Moment Reaction 2 (Total)

1000000
Moment Reaction (Nm)

500000

-500000

-1000000

-1500000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)

Fig 18 Moment Reaction at support 2

Moment Reaction at support 3


Table 13 Moment Reaction at support 3
Time [s] Moment Moment Moment Moment
Reaction 3 Reaction 3 Reaction 3 (Z) Reaction 3
(X) [N·m] (Y) [N·m] [N·m] (Total) [N·m]
0.50143 642.12 -256.31 -1.7465e+005 1.7465e+005
1.0029 2786.6 -174.95 1.2207e+005 1.221e+005
1.5043 2574.9 162.18 4.338e+005 4.3381e+005
2.0057 658.1 259.63 3.089e+005 3.089e+005
2.5071 -2513.9 -19.016 -2.8431e+005 2.8432e+005
3.0086 -5920.4 -651.26 -1.0001e+006 1.0001e+006
3.51 -7261.8 -1349. -1.452e+006 1.452e+006
4.0114 -7038.9 -757.26 -1.5505e+006 1.5505e+006
4.5129 -5335.5 1203.6 -1.1889e+006 1.1889e+006
5.0143 -1326.2 3328.4 -3.611e+005 3.6112e+005
5.5157 5042.2 6229.5 7.0857e+005 7.0861e+005
6.0171 9611.8 8949. 1.4872e+006 1.4872e+006
6.5186 10649 8585. 1.8265e+006 1.8265e+006
7.02 9530.3 7181.7 1.8509e+006 1.851e+006
7.5214 7044.1 5204.6 1.6195e+006 1.6195e+006
8.0229 4906.9 3258.2 1.1794e+006 1.1794e+006
8.5243 2582.1 1403.7 5.3627e+005 5.3628e+005
9.0257 536.59 -34.839 -1.1103e+005 1.1103e+005
9.5271 -510.15 -669.07 -4.1387e+005 4.1387e+005
10.029 -894.84 -667.65 -3.2607e+005 3.2607e+005
10.53 -448.13 -302.75 -41551 41554
11.031 288.65 26.61 1.4403e+005 1.4403e+005
11.533 331.9 50.441 59588 59589
12.034 -52.609 -135.58 -1.621e+005 1.621e+005
12.536 -84.549 -171.61 -2.0083e+005 2.0083e+005
13.037 18.443 -9.9769 -5292.8 5292.8
13.539 -130. 115.4 1.5386e+005 1.5386e+005
14.04 -158.45 73.466 1.0232e+005 1.0232e+005

Moment Reaction (X)


Moment Reaction (Y)
Moment Reaction (Z)
2000000 Moment Reaction (Total)

1500000

1000000
Force Reaction (Nm)

500000

-500000

-1000000

-1500000

-2000000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)

Fig 19 Moment Reaction at support 3

Moment Reaction at support 4


Table 14 Moment Reaction at support 4
Time [s] Moment Moment Moment Moment
Reaction 4 Reaction 4 Reaction 4 (Z) Reaction 4
(X) [N·m] (Y) [N·m] [N·m] (Total) [N·m]
0.50143 178.97 -143.87 -1.6337e+005 1.6337e+005
1.0029 127.26 -13.582 -13755 13756
1.5043 174.22 155.18 1.9091e+005 1.9091e+005
2.0057 48.225 126.51 1.5043e+005 1.5043e+005
2.5071 -239.58 7.7858 -56021 56022
3.0086 -67.596 -34.705 -1.5113e+005 1.5113e+005
3.51 853.76 131.47 43589 43598
4.0114 1199.2 387.98 3.1879e+005 3.1879e+005
4.5129 562.6 509.25 4.175e+005 4.175e+005
5.0143 -1127.9 232.31 1.101e+005 1.101e+005
5.5157 -4696.1 -468.3 -5.2421e+005 5.2423e+005
6.0171 -8688.8 -1795.8 -1.1748e+006 1.1748e+006
6.5186 -10309 -3666. -1.6154e+006 1.6155e+006
7.02 -10582 -5244.9 -1.861e+006 1.861e+006
7.5214 -9328.5 -5766.5 -1.8383e+006 1.8383e+006
8.0229 -7048.8 -3039.8 -1.5123e+006 1.5123e+006
8.5243 -3390.3 92.495 -7.2238e+005 7.2239e+005
9.0257 997.43 903.36 3.5116e+005 3.5116e+005
9.5271 3966.7 1073.9 1.1921e+006 1.1921e+006
10.029 4829.3 1471.8 1.5481e+006 1.5481e+006
10.53 4946. 1750.9 1.4577e+006 1.4577e+006
11.031 4491.8 1475.5 9.986e+005 9.9861e+005
11.533 2333.2 602.33 2.8872e+005 2.8873e+005
12.034 -792.84 -313.57 -3.2223e+005 3.2223e+005
12.536 -2677.7 -662.55 -4.5213e+005 4.5214e+005
13.037 -3110.4 -527.09 -1.481e+005 1.4813e+005
13.539 -802.14 -103.28 1.5878e+005 1.5878e+005
14.04 922.34 128.44 1.3813e+005 1.3813e+005
Moment Reaction 4 (X)
Moment Reaction 4 (Y)
Moment Reaction 4 (Z)
2000000
Moment Reaction 4 (Total)
1500000

1000000
Moment Reaction(Nm)

500000

-500000

-1000000

-1500000

-2000000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)

Fig 20 Moment Reaction at support 4

Moment Reaction at support 5


Table 15 Moment Reaction at support 5
Time [s] Moment Moment Moment Moment
Reaction 5 Reaction 5 Reaction 5 (Z) Reaction 5
(X) [N·m] (Y) [N·m] [N·m] (Total) [N·m]
0.50143 -279.66 -86.529 -1.3597e+005 1.3597e+005
1.0029 -204.69 22.235 -1717.3 1729.6
1.5043 52.943 150.66 1.7626e+005 1.7626e+005
2.0057 62.276 111.11 1.3555e+005 1.3555e+005
2.5071 90.947 -54.737 -62036 62036
3.0086 123.48 -170.14 -1.8675e+005 1.8675e+005
3.51 364.94 -97.467 -67427 67428
4.0114 583.88 51.553 1.4061e+005 1.4061e+005
4.5129 668.02 143.03 2.5035e+005 2.5035e+005
5.0143 170.67 72.115 99131 99131
5.5157 -353.16 -50.608 -1.5867e+005 1.5867e+005
6.0171 310.41 -17.223 -1.9177e+005 1.9177e+005
6.5186 2149.7 235.63 1.0096e+005 1.0098e+005
7.02 3815.9 535.74 4.8292e+005 4.8294e+005
7.5214 4654.8 729.55 7.8881e+005 7.8883e+005
8.0229 3796.2 720.79 8.4482e+005 8.4483e+005
8.5243 1448.8 385.37 4.4351e+005 4.4351e+005
9.0257 -1789.1 -654.63 -3.3639e+005 3.364e+005
9.5271 -4998.1 -2855.9 -1.0678e+006 1.0678e+006
10.029 -6830.3 -5869.2 -1.4655e+006 1.4655e+006
10.53 -7563.6 -6639.3 -1.4777e+006 1.4777e+006
11.031 -6665.4 -3833.1 -1.0704e+006 1.0704e+006
11.533 -3753.1 -1469.4 -2.6268e+005 2.6271e+005
12.034 -1307.2 -3143.9 6.6443e+005 6.6443e+005
12.536 -1570.8 -5386.4 1.2566e+006 1.2566e+006
13.037 -2004.3 -4484.3 1.3373e+006 1.3373e+006
13.539 866.23 -1638.6 9.5196e+005 9.5196e+005
14.04 2324.9 173.36 3.2335e+005 3.2336e+005
Moment Reaction 4 (X)
Moment Reaction 4 (Y)
Moment Reaction 4 (Z)
1500000 Moment Reaction 4 (Total)

1000000
Moment Reaction (Nm)

500000

-500000

-1000000

-1500000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)

Fig 21 Moment Reaction at support 5


So, from the above reference, total force reaction is calculated in each supports
and moment reaction at each support is extracted and tabulated below
Table 16 force reactions and moment extracted for modeling
Ob
Mome Mome Mome Mome Mome
jec Force Force Force Force Force Force
nt nt nt nt nt
t Reacti Reacti Reacti Reacti Reacti Reacti
Reacti Reacti Reacti Reacti Reacti
Na on on 2 on 3 on 4 on 5 on 6
on on 2 on 3 on 4 on 5
me
Results
-
X - - - - 3.4662 - -
1.8954 161.56 922.34 2324.9
Axi 20150 39344 43985 54994 e+005 147.55 158.45
e+005 N·m N·m N·m
s N N N N N N·m N·m
N
Y - - 9.1315
2883.1 65.655 64123 144.01 154.89 73.466 128.44 173.36
Axi 543.19 789.84 e+005
N N N N·m N·m N·m N·m N·m
s N N N
Z - - 1.0232 1.3813 3.2335
7.378 -33.34 251.27 48.343 59808 87221
Axi 2.8557 321.49 e+005 e+005 e+005
N N N N N·m N·m
s N N N·m N·m N·m
2.001e 9.7672 1.0232 1.3813 3.2336
Tot 20355 39344 43989 55000 59808 87221
+005 e+005 e+005 e+005 e+005
al N N N N N·m N·m
N N N·m N·m N·m
Maximum Value Over Time
X 2.0835 1.2155 1.4407 1.8457 1.3965 1.022e
1020.3 7217.8 10649 4946. 4654.8
Axi e+005 e+006 e+006 e+006 e+006 +006
N·m N·m N·m N·m N·m
s N N N N N N
Y 1.5246 1.8576 1.8987 1.9015 1.863e 1.5225
5822.3 3156.3 8949. 1750.9 729.55
Axi e+006 e+006 e+006 e+006 +006 e+006
N·m N·m N·m N·m N·m
s N N N N N N
Z 1.076e 1.4934 1.8509 1.5481 1.3373
223.49 450.6 356.99 538.21 653.33 279.5
Axi +006 e+006 e+006 e+006 e+006
N N N N N N
s N·m N·m N·m N·m N·m
1.7657 2.0182 2.3566 2.3746 2.0161 1.759e 1.0761 1.4934 1.851e 1.861e 1.4777
Tot
e+006 e+006 e+006 e+006 e+006 +006 e+006 e+006 +006 +006 e+006
al
N N N N N N N·m N·m N·m N·m N·m
Minimum Value Over Time
- - - - - -
X - - - -
1.0447 1.4089 1.8287 1.4428 1.2341 2.0715 -9617.
Axi 3679.7 7261.8 10582 7563.6
e+006 e+006 e+006 e+006 e+006 e+005 N·m
s N·m N·m N·m N·m
N N N N N N
- - -
Y - - - - - - -
1.0137 1.4619 1.4566 -1349.
Axi 73417 74316 94727 2325.2 12062 5766.5 6639.3
e+005 e+005 e+005 N·m
s N N N N·m N·m N·m N·m
N N N
- - - - -
Z - - - - -
-346.3 4.5105 1.3514 1.5505 1.861e 1.4777
Axi 313.59 436.82 469.99 566.43 363.59
N e+005 e+006 e+006 +006 e+006
s N N N N N
N·m N·m N·m N·m N·m
Tot 3465.1 7256.9 5125.4 11493 590.85 543.28 9784.4 14999 5292.8 13756 1729.6
al N N N N N N N·m N·m N·m N·m N·m
Information
Ti
14.04 s
me
Deformation

Fig 22 Total Deformation


From FEM model, Maximum deflection will occur at the mid of bridge as shown
in above figure and values are tabulated below. Maximum deformation will
occur at mid position of bridge.

Table 17 Deformation data


Time [s] Deformation Probe (X) [m]
0.50143 3.7604e-005
1.0029 1.1641e-004
1.5043 1.5278e-004
2.0057 9.3709e-005
2.5071 1.5015e-005
3.0086 5.8844e-005
3.51 1.3735e-004
4.0114 1.8959e-004
4.5129 1.5936e-004
5.0143 5.5085e-005
5.5157 3.4964e-005
6.0171 1.1386e-004
6.5186 2.333e-004
7.02 3.2769e-004
7.5214 3.3724e-004
8.0229 2.6634e-004
8.5243 1.2012e-004
9.0257 1.677e-005
9.5271 6.8519e-005
10.029 1.4576e-004
10.53 1.8084e-004
11.031 1.4253e-004
11.533 4.8933e-005
12.034 3.5971e-005
12.536 9.7351e-005
13.037 1.4355e-004
13.539 1.2065e-004
14.04 4.5173e-005

Deformation (X)

0.00035

0.00030

0.00025
Deformation (X) (m)

0.00020

0.00015

0.00010

0.00005

0.00000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time [s] (s)

Fig 23 Deformation occurrence at bridge


The equivalent stress is calculated from stress using von-mises approach and
termed as von-mises stress  eq , and it can be computed from:

1
 eq   ( xx   yy )2  ( yy   zz ) 2  ( xx   zz ) 2  6( yz2   xz2   xy2 )
2

Where,
 xx ,  yy and  zz are normal-stress;
 xy , xz and  xy are shear stress.

The von-Mises stress or effective equivalent stress  eq ,may be represented in

the following term by using principal stresses.

1
 eq   ( 1   2 )2  ( 2   3 ) 2  ( 1   3 ) 2
2

Where,
 1 ,  2 and  3 principal stresses.
when the von-Mises or equivalent stress  eq value becomes equal to the value

of critical stress, the material will starts yielding and deform plastically and so
this stress is termed as yield stress.
But in concrete, due to cyclic loading the material fails before yielding,

1 3
 eq   ( xx   yy )2  ( zz   xx )2  ( xx   zz ) 2  ( xy2   yz2   xz2 )
2(1   ) 2

Where,all the indication are in there usual form .

Simarlily, the above equation of equivalent strain represented in terms


of principal strain as below
1
 eq   (1   2 ) 2  ( 3  1 ) 2  ( 2   3 ) 2
2(1   )

Where
1 ,  2 , and  3 are principal strains

Strain at mid-span of longer span


Table 18 Equivalent strain
Time [s] Equivalent strain [m/m]
0.50143 1.5367e-005
1.0029 2.5321e-005
1.5043 2.5543e-005
2.0057 1.237e-005
2.5071 6.6821e-006
3.0086 2.1025e-005
3.51 2.6379e-005
4.0114 3.0055e-005
4.5129 2.1023e-005
5.0143 6.7231e-006
5.5157 1.3175e-005
6.0171 2.9279e-005
6.5186 4.2972e-005
7.02 4.2172e-005
7.5214 4.2825e-005
8.0229 2.8185e-005
8.5243 1.2656e-005
9.0257 6.6835e-006
9.5271 2.1137e-005
10.029 3.039e-005
10.53 2.5916e-005
11.031 2.0752e-005
11.533 6.586e-006
12.034 1.2221e-005
12.536 2.587e-005
13.037 2.5615e-005
13.539 1.5421e-005
14.04 5.152e-006

Equivalent strain
0.000045

0.000040

0.000035
Equivalent strain (m/m)

0.000030

0.000025

0.000020

0.000015

0.000010

0.000005

0.000000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (s)

Fig 23 Equivalent strain distribution

Data execrated from Analysis of FEM model


Total deformation, Maximum principal strain, Minimum principal strain,
Maximum shear strain, Equivalent strain and data are extracted from FEM
model.
Table 19a Strain Data extracted
Maxi Mini Maxi Maxi Mini Maxi
mum mum mum Equiv mum mum mum Elas She
Directi Princ Prin Shea alent Princ Prin Shea tic ar
Total
onal ipal cipal r Elasti ipal cipal r Strai Elas
Type Defor
Defor Elast Elast Elast c Elast Elast Elast n tic
mation
mation ic ic ic Strai ic ic ic Inte Strai
Strai Strai Strai n Strai Strai Strai nsity n
n n n n n n
Results
- - - - -
- 8.10 6.550
2.15 5.18 2.15 5.18 4.66
Mini 3.436 82e- 2e- 8.1082e-
0. m 5e- 31e- 5e- 31e- 47e-
mum 4e- 010 010 010 m/m
009 006 009 006 006
003 m m/m m/m
m/m m/m m/m m/m m/m
3.37 2.04 6.83 3.37 2.04 1.88
5.867 3.443 5.152
Maxi 18e- 8e- 42e- 18e- 8e- 6.8342e- 34e-
5e- 6e- e-006
mum 006 008 006 006 008 006 m/m 006
003 m 003 m m/m
m/m m/m m/m m/m m/m m/m
Minimum Value Over Time
- - - - -
- 8.47 6.378
2.87 4.30 2.87 4.30 2.22
Mini 3.436 4e- 7e- 8.474e-
0. m 64e- 07e- 64e- 07e- 84e-
mum 4e- 011 011 011 m/m
007 005 007 005 005
003 m m/m m/m
m/m m/m m/m m/m m/m
- - - - -
- 5.07 6.820
2.15 5.18 2.15 5.18 2.22
Maxi 4.050 76e- 2e- 5.0776e-
0. m 5e- 31e- 5e- 31e- 53e-
mum 7e- 009 009 009 m/m
009 006 009 006 006
004 m m/m m/m
m/m m/m m/m m/m m/m
Maximum Value Over Time
3.37 4.41 6.83 3.37 4.41 1.88
5.059 8.161 5.152
Mini 18e- 9e- 42e- 18e- 9e- 6.8342e- 34e-
5e- 5e- e-006
mum 006 011 006 006 011 006 m/m 006
004 m 005 m m/m
m/m m/m m/m m/m m/m m/m
4.04 1.48 5.58 4.297 4.04 1.48 2.06
5.867 3.443
Maxi 58e- 02e- 95e- 2e- 58e- 02e- 5.5895e- 09e-
5e- 6e-
mum 005 007 005 005 005 007 005 m/m 005
003 m 003 m
m/m m/m m/m m/m m/m m/m m/m

Table 19b Extrated stress and strain


Vec
tor Equi Equi Equiv
Maxi Minim Nor
Prin vale vale alent Maxi
mum um Stres Norm mal
cip nt nt (von- mum Shear
Typ Princi Princi s al Ela
al Plas Tota Mises Shear Stres
e pal pal Intens Stres stic
Ela tic l ) Stres s
Stres Stres ity s Stra
stic Strai Strai Stres s
s s in
Str n n s
ain
Results
-
6.55 - - - -
Mini 4.5
0. 02e- 120.3 3.211 1.201 62.37 124.7 3.588 9.033
mu 192
m/m 010 Pa 3e+0 2e+0 1 Pa 4 Pa 3e+0 7e+0
m e-
m/m 05 Pa 06 Pa 05 Pa 05 Pa
006
m/
m
3.3
5.15 586
Max 1.029 7.167 2.086 5.257 1.051 1.448 7.143
0. 2e- e-
imu 9e+0 3e+0 e+00 1e+0 4e+0 8e+0 3e+0
m/m 006 006
m 06 Pa 05 Pa 5 Pa 05 Pa 06 Pa 05 Pa 05 Pa
m/m m/
m
Minimum Value Over Time
-
4.3
6.37 - - - -
Mini 007
0. 87e- 11.35 1.555 8.613 6.518 13.03 1.714 8.613
mu e-
m/m 011 1 Pa 3e+0 e+00 5 Pa 7 Pa 1e+0 e+00
m 005
m/m 06 Pa 6 Pa 06 Pa 6 Pa
m/
m
-
4.5
6.82 - - - -
Max 192
0. 02e- 700.1 3.211 1.201 390.5 781.1 1.711 9.033
imu e-
m/m 009 9 Pa 3e+0 2e+0 9 Pa 7 Pa 8e+0 7e+0
m 006
m/m 05 Pa 06 Pa 05 Pa 05 Pa
m/
m
Maximum Value Over Time
3.3
5.15 586
Mini 1.029 7.167 1.872 5.257 1.051 1.448 7.143
0. 2e- e-
mu 9e+0 3e+0 7e+0 1e+0 4e+0 8e+0 3e+0
m/m 006 006
m 06 Pa 05 Pa 05 Pa 05 Pa 06 Pa 05 Pa 05 Pa
m/m m/
m
4.0
4.29 458
Max 8.593 8.115 1.259 4.299 8.599 1.585 8.115
0. 72e- e-
imu 7e+0 3e+0 7e+0 6e+0 2e+0 3e+0 3e+0
m/m 005 005
m 06 Pa 06 Pa 06 Pa 06 Pa 06 Pa 06 Pa 06 Pa
m/m m/
m

Table 20 Summary of result obtained


Maximum Principal stress 7.1673e+005 Pa
Equivalent (von-Mises) 1.0299e+006 Pa
Strain 1297.7 J
Maximum Value Over Time
Maximum Principal 8.1153e+006 Pa
Equivalent (von-Mises) 8.5937e+006 Pa
Strain 3657.8 J
Minimum Value Over Time
Maximum Principal 7.1673e+005 Pa
Equivalent (von-Mises) 1.0299e+006 Pa
Strain 222.23 J
Analysis Time and steps
Time 14.04 s
Load Step 1
Substep 28
Iteration Number 73

Appropriate model for Fatigue Damage


There are various different types approaches that are used to forecast the
fatigue life of a bridge. There are many factors over which the type of used
approach depends, such as type of material used, types of deformation and
mode of cyclic loading.
The fracture mechanics approach is also one of the approach that is
being used for fatigue life prediction. This technique is more appropriate for
modeling cracks where plasticity is negligible, like in brittle materials. Where
plasticity is not negligible and material suffers plastic deformation or distributed
damage, the fracture-mechanics approach becomes inappropriate technique
for modeling of damage and cracks. Because the integral bridge experience
plastic deformation and it experiences low-cycle fatigue,so a strain-based
model is used for fatigue modeling and fatigue life of integral bridge is
calculated using the formula given as (Mander et al,. 1994; Koh and Stephens
1991):
Where,
 a = strain amplitude in single cycle of load and
N f = number of cycles to before failure.
This model was projected by Koh and Stephens (1991) for determining
of the low-cycle fatigue life and the method was reconsidered (Mander et al,.
1994) and correlated with experiments, it showed 98% correlation.

Mostly, uniaxial test id used for fatigue modeling. It is unreasonable to


conduct a fatigue behavior of material in a 3D state of stress. Though, a 3D
state of stress in real situation is very common. Therefore, for calculation of
fatigue life an concept of equivalent stress and strain is developed (Stephens
and Fatemi 2001). The fatigue life will be computed by using equivalent strain
amplitude and the number of cycles to failure will be calculated using value of
 eq . The principal-strain amplitudes can be used in placed of principal strain as

follows (Stephens and Fatemi 2001):

1
 eq   ( a1   a 2 ) 2  ( a 3   a1 ) 2  ( a 2   a 3 ) 2
2(1   )

Where  a1 ,  a 2 and  a3 = principal-strain amplitudes

Further, the equivalent strain amplitude  eq extracted from the FE model

is used in  a  0.0795(2 N f )0.448 in order to find out the total number of cycles

before failure.

For prediction of failure caused by fatigue on the basis of hysteresis loops,


energy-based model might be used because cyclic hysteresis energy
comprises of both the stress and the strain hysteresis and it is assumed that
will show the complete behavior of fatigue damage due to cyclic loading. One
of the model that is commonly used is model of Akay et al,. (1997) proposed a
formula that is based on total energy, proposed as

1
 W  k
N f   total 
 W0 
Where,
Wtotal = total strain energy released in one cycle of loading,
N f  mean cycles to failure, and W0 and k fatigue coefficients.

In accordance of plastic deformation and strain energy type fatigue life can be
calculated for a model.

Table 21 Strain Energy


Time [s] Strain Energy [J]
0.50143 308.91
1.0029 796.84
1.5043 712.22
2.0057 327.31
2.5071 222.23
3.0086 641.17
3.51 1214.7
4.0114 1298.7
4.5129 847.91
5.0143 433.09
5.5157 609.11
6.0171 1603.1
6.5186 2955.8
7.02 3657.8
7.5214 3163.
8.0229 2011.7
8.5243 1149.3
9.0257 1014.5
9.5271 1492.3
10.029 2040.2
10.53 2043.
11.031 1565.5
11.533 1200.2
12.034 1333.4
12.536 1796.3
13.037 1939.1
13.539 1548.2
14.04 1297.7

strain Energy
4000

3500

3000

2500
strain Energy (Nm)

2000

1500

1000

500

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time [s] (s)

Fig 24 Strain energy

The maximum amount of maximum strain will occur at the mid position of longer
span. From the above chart, maximum strain of 3657.8 Nm at mid of brigde.

Hysteresis curve
Fig 25 Hysteresis curve

The hysteresis curve for this bridge of 156 m is shown in above diagram and
its nature straight line and having proportion stress and strain amplitude.
Table 22 Fatigue life result and validation

Total Maximum Equivalent Fatigue life in Fatigue life Fatigue life from
length Span(mid) strain number of cycles (in years) ANSYS 17.1
of Amplitude using (In years)
bridge  a  0.0795(2 N f )0.448
156 40m 7.67E-04 1.58E+06 76 79.342
161 45m 8.88E-04 1.14E+06 63 63.964
166 50m 1.01E-03 8.58E+05 54.6 53.234
171 55m 1.13E-03 4.72E+05 43.14 42.234
176 60m 1.25E-03 3.23E+05 37.58 35.8974
181 65m 1.37E-03 2.47E+05 21.75 17.954
186 70m 1.49E-03 9.06E+04 15.24 12.134

From above analysis, as tabulated in Table 22 it has been found that the
fatigue life of integral bridge for 156 m long having maximum span of 40 m is
76 years and for a bridge of length 186 m having maximum span of 70 m it
reduced to 15 years approximately.
CHAPTER 5
Conclusion
In this paper, a finite element modeling and analysis has been conducted for
evaluating the fatigue-life for different integral bridge. The same fatigue life
modeling is performed for 156 m, 161 m, 161 m,166 m, 171m, 176m,181m and
186 m bridge length. Fatigue life is evaluated form strain life based approach.
As it was realized, the finite element modeling confirms that the fatigue life of
integral bridge will reduce when the total strain amplitude increases due to
increase in the length of bridge.
Further, the behavior of integral bridge of 156m that was subjected to
transient loading of 70-R as per as IRC:6-2014 is studied. Total 7 types of
variation are considered in length of longer span and model is prepared in
ANSYS 17.1 design modeler.

The Fatigue life of integral bridge was found from mathematical model of
approximately 76 years for a integral bridge of 156 m long with a maximum
span of 40 m, and for the bridge of 186 m length with a span of maximum 70
m, it was found to be decreases about 15.24 years. So, it can be concluded
that as the length of span between two piers increases the fatigue life
decreases.
Further Scope

The study is purely based on the computer based simulation model. To


validate the working of this study, there is need of applying this on physical
model.

Further it this study can be extended for the other types of bridges like
steel box girder bridge, conventional stone bridge with a more longer span to
predict the fatigue life.

In this study, Integral bridge taken have only two lanes, this study can
further used for multilane bridge subjected to more adverse traffic condition.
The temperature variation due to seasonal and daily variation is not taken into
consideration, that is also an important factor and should be considered for
further progress of this project.