Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40069-013-0037-0

Effect of a Time Dependent Concrete Modulus of Elasticity on Prestress Losses in Bridge Girders  

Singh, Brahama P. (Bridge Division, Dallas District, Texas Department of Transportation)
Yazdani, Nur (Department of Civil Engineering, University of Texas at Arlington)
Ramirez, Guillermo (Buildings and Structures, Exponent)
Publication Information
International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials / v.7, no.3, 2013 , pp. 183-191 More about this Journal
Abstract
Prestress losses assumed for bridge girder design and deflection analyses are dependent on the concrete modulus of elasticity (MOE). Most design specifications, such as the American Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) bridge specifications, contain a constant value for the MOE based on the unit weight of concrete and the concrete compressive strength at 28 days. It has been shown in the past that that the concrete MOE varies with the age of concrete. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a time-dependent and variable MOE on the prestress losses assumed for bridge girder design. For this purpose, three different variable MOE models from the literature were investigated: Dischinger (Der Bauingenieur 47/48(20):563-572, 1939a; Der Bauingenieur 5/6(20):53-63, 1939b; Der Bauingenieur, 21/22(20):286-437, 1939c), American Concrete Institute (ACI) 209 (Tech. Rep. ACI 209R-92, 1992) and CEB-FIP (CEB-FIP Model Code, 2010). A typical bridge layout for the Dallas, Texas, USA, area was assumed herein. A prestressed concrete beam design and analysis program from the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) was utilized to determine the prestress losses. The values of the time dependent MOE and also specific prestress losses from each model were compared. The MOE predictions based on the ACI and the CEB-FIP models were close to each other; in long-term, they approach the constant AASHTO value. Dischinger's model provides for higher MOE values. The elastic shortening and the long term losses from the variable MOE models are lower than that using a constant MOE up to deck casting time. In long term, the variable MOE-based losses approach that from the constant MOE predictions. The Dischinger model would result in more conservative girder design while the ACI and the CEB-FIP models would result in designs more consistent with the AASHTO approach.
Keywords
concrete modulus of elasticity; prestress losses; bridge girders; I-girders;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). (2010). AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 5th Edition, Washington DC, USA.
2 American Concrete Institute (ACI). (1992). Prediction of creep, shrinkage, and temperature effects in concrete structures. Technical Publication. ACI 209R-92.
3 CEB-FIP. (2010). CEB-FIP Model Code 2010. Comite Euro- International du Beton.
4 Dischinger, F. (1939a). Elastiche und Plastische Verformungen Der Eisenbetontragwerke Und Insbesondere Der Bogenbrucken. Der Bauingenieur, 47/48 (20), 563-572.
5 Dischinger, F. (1939b). Elastiche und Plastische Verformungen Der Eisenbetontragwerke Und Insbesondere Der Bogenbrucken. Der Bauingenieur, 5/6 (20), 53-63.
6 Dischinger, F. (1939c). Elastiche und Plastische Verformungen Der Eisenbetontragwerke Und Insbesondere Der Bogenbrucken. Der Bauingenieur, 21/22 (20), 286-437.
7 Nemati, K. M. (2006). Modulus of elasticity of high-strength concrete. Karachi: CBM-CI International Workshop.
8 Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). (2004). Texas Department of Transportation standard specifications. Austin: Texas Department of Transportation.
9 Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). (2005). LRFD bridge design manual. Austin: Texas Department of Transportation.
10 Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). (2007). Prestressed concrete beam design/analysis program user guide. Austin: Texas Department of Transportation.
11 Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). (2010). Bridge design standards.Austin: TexasDepartment of Transportation.
12 Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). (2012). Bridge railing manual. Austin: Texas Department of Transportation.
13 Tia, M., Liu, Y.,& Brown, D. (2005). Modulus of elasticity, creep and shrinkage of concrete. Final report, Florida Department of Transportation, Contract No. BC-354.
14 Yazdani, N., McKinnie, B., & Haroon, S. (2005). Aggregate based modulus of elasticity for Florida concrete. Journal of Transportation Research Record (TRR), 1914, 15-23.   DOI