ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY

ADDIS ABABA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

SCHOOL OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEERING

ASSESSMENT OF LOAD CARRYING

CAPACITY OF ARCH BRIDGE-Case Study
on Odie Bridge
A Thesis Submitted to School of Graduate Studies in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for Degree of
Master of Science
in
Civil Engineering (Structures)

By Abiyu Awoke
June, 2020
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
The undersigned have examined the thesis entitled Assessment of Load Carrying
Capacity of Arch Bridge: Case study on Odie Bridge; presented by Abiyu Awoke
Adgeh, a candidate for the degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering (Structures)
and hereby certify that it is worthy of acceptance.

Dr. Abrham Gebre

Advisor Signature Date

Internal Examiner Signature Date

External Examiner Signature Date

Chair person Signature Date

i
 UNDERTAKING

I certify that my research work entitled Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch
Bridge Case study on Odie Bridge is my original work done under the supervision of my
research advisor Dr. Abrham Gebre. The work has not been presented elsewhere for
assessment. The material used from other sources has been properly
acknowledged/referred.

Signature ______________________

Abiyu Awoke

ii
 ABSTRACT

Arch bridges possess an enormous capacity that can carry larger load than assessed through

the application of limit state analysis and experimental methods. In the case of arch

bridges, accessing detailed information of the structure is a bit difficult.

In this study, load carrying capacity of Odie bridge, which is non-reinforced concrete arch

bridge found in Ethiopia Federal Road Network, is carried out. Nonlinear finite element

analysis was adopted using the total strain crack model in Midas FEA. Arch Bridge can

manage load even with the formation of hinges. The study is focused on identification of

the formation of cracks in arch barrel due to its own weight and vehicular loads applied at

the quarter and crown point of the arch. Moreover, an influence surface along the top

surface of the bridge was generated. Using the influence surface, the vehicular axle load

positions were identified. Crack formation and stress in the arch due to a moving load is

captured.

To validate the numerical model, verification on Prestwood Bridge was used. The study

revealed that the comparison between the numerical model and the full-scale test of

Prestwood Bridge is applicable to estimate load carrying capacity of non-reinforced

concrete arch bridges.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First of all, I would like to thank the Almighty God, who I am highly indebted to, for
giving me everything I need to finish this thesis on time. Next, I also would like to thank
my thesis advisor, Dr. Abrham Gebre, for his continuous support. My gratitude goes to
Midas IT Department for their continuous support.

Furthermore, I would like to thank everyone who had contributed to the successful
completion of this thesis and a special thank to my wife, who helped and encouraged me
during challenging times that I have faced.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................... III

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................. IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................ V

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ VII

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... VIII

CHAPTER 1 ...................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background .......................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Statement of the Problem ..................................................................................... 1
1.3 Objective .............................................................................................................. 1
1.3.1 General Objective ......................................................................................... 1

1.3.2 Specific Objective ......................................................................................... 2

1.4 Limitation of the Thesis ....................................................................................... 2

1.5 Organization of the Thesis ................................................................................... 2
CHAPTER 2 ...................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 History of Arch Bridges ....................................................................................... 4

2.2 Arch Bridges in Ethiopia...................................................................................... 5
2.3 Analysis Methods ................................................................................................. 6
2.3.1 Analytical Methods ....................................................................................... 6

2.3.2 Semi-Empirical Methods ............................................................................ 13

2.4 Numerical Analysis (Software Programs) ......................................................... 15

2.4.1 3D Non-Linear Finite Element Model Systems ......................................... 15

CHAPTER 3 .................................................................................................................... 17

3.1 Construction of the bridge.................................................................................. 17

3.2 Maintenance history of the bridge ..................................................................... 19
3.3 Inspection of the bridge...................................................................................... 20
3.4 Dimensions of the Odie Bridge.......................................................................... 20
3.5 Compressive strength of Concrete ..................................................................... 21
CHAPTER 4 .................................................................................................................... 22

CHAPTER 5 .................................................................................................................... 25
v
 5.1 Finite Element Model Using Midas FEA .......................................................... 25
5.2 Validation ........................................................................................................... 25
5.3 Odie Bridge ........................................................................................................ 29
5.4 Modeling of the Bridge of Odie Bridge ............................................................. 32
5.5 Loading .............................................................................................................. 33
5.6 Analysis .............................................................................................................. 34
CHAPTER 6 .................................................................................................................... 37

CHAPTER 7 .................................................................................................................... 42

7.1 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 42

7.2 Recommendation ............................................................................................... 42
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 43

APPENDIX A .................................................................................................................. 45

APPENDIX B .................................................................................................................. 47

APPENDIX C .................................................................................................................. 50

APPENDIX D .................................................................................................................. 51

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1: Characteristic Compressive Strength of the Concrete Sets ............................. 21

Table 5-1 Material Properties of arch Concrete ............................................................... 32
Table 5-2 Material Properties of Backfill ......................................................................... 33

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1 Pont du Gard Aqueduct, France (Chen and Duan) ........................................... 4
Figure 2-2 Zhao Zhou Bridge, China (Qian,1987) ............................................................. 5
Figure 2-3 Geometry models in maximum stress analyses: 3-pin (a, b), 2-pin (c) and fixed-
end arch rib (d) (Sustainable Bridges SB4.7.3) .................................................................. 8
Figure 2-4 Location and variation of thrust line and Zone of Thrust in segments.
(Sustainable Bridges SB4.7.3) ............................................................................................ 9
Figure 2-5 Stress Block in the Zone of Thrust (Sustainable Bridges SB4.7.3) ................ 11
Figure 2-6 Collapse Mechanism of an Arch (Heyman J.) ................................................ 13
Figure 2-7 Arch Dimension and Description (ERA Bridge Design Manual 2013) ......... 14
Figure 2-8 Nomogram for Determining the Provisional Axle Loading of Masonry arch
bridge before factoring ..................................................................................................... 15
Figure 3-1 Bridge Profile of Odie Bridge (ERA BMS, 2010).......................................... 18
Figure 3-2 The Odie Bridge .............................................................................................. 19
Figure 3-3 Reconstruction of the part of the parapet wall ................................................ 19
Figure 3-4 Damage by vehicle Collison on Parapet walls ................................................ 20
Figure 3-5 Odie Bridge Geometry .................................................................................... 20
Figure 4-1 Hordijk Tension Softening Curve (Midas FEA, 2016) ................................... 23
Figure 4-2 Thorenfeldt Compression mode for Concrete (Midas FEA, 2016) ................ 23
Figure 5-1 Prestwood Bridge before Collapse (Sustainable Bridges SB4.7.3) ................ 26
Figure 5-2 Geometry of Prestwood bridge (Page ,1987) .................................................. 26
Figure 5-3 FE Model of Prestwood Bridge. ..................................................................... 27
Figure 5-4 Prestwood Bridge: Mechanism (Page,1987)................................................... 28
Figure 5-5 Vertical displacements of Point Under loading for Prestwood Bridge ........... 28
Figure 5-6 Boundary Condition of Odie Bridge ............................................................... 29
Figure 5-7 Influence surface for solid stress at the Springing point ................................. 30
Figure 5-8 Influence surface for solid stress at the Quarter point .................................... 30
Figure 5-9 Influence surface for solid stress at Crown ..................................................... 30
Figure 5-10 Final discretization using Auto-Mesh Finite Element Model of the Bridge . 31
Figure 5-11 Truck Type 3 Unit Weight = 227 kN ............................................................ 33
Figure 5-12 Truck Type 3-2 Unit Weight = 325 kN ........................................................ 33
Figure 5-13 Truck Type 3-3 Unit Weight = 364 kN ........................................................ 34
Figure 5-14 Loading at Quarter Point, Legal Truck Type-3 ............................................ 34

viii
Figure 5-15 Loading at Crown, Legal Truck Type-3 ....................................................... 35
Figure 5-16 Loading at Quarter Point, Legal Truck Type-3-2 ......................................... 35
Figure 5-17 Loading at Crown, Legal Truck Type-3-2 .................................................... 35
Figure 6-1 Hinge No.1 at Quarter Point, Legal Truck Type 3, Total Axle Load= 2824.87kN
at 11th Load step ................................................................................................................ 37
Figure 6-2 Hinge No.2 at Right Springing Point, Legal truck Type 3, Total Axle
Load=4622.52 kN at 18th Load step ................................................................................ 38
Figure 6-3 Hinge No.3 at Three Quarter Point, Legal truck Type 3, Total Axle
Load=6163.36 kN at 24th Load step ................................................................................. 38
Figure 6-4 Hinge No.4 at Left Springing Point, Legal truck Type 3, Total Axle
Load=6933.78kN at 27th Load step ................................................................................. 38
Figure 6-5 Vertical Displacement of quarter-point on arch under the Load for Legal Truck
Load type 3 ....................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 6-6 Hinge No.1 at Load at Crown, Legal Truck Type 3, Total Axle
Load=6676.97kN at 13th Load step .................................................................................. 40
Figure 6-7 Hinge No.2 at Springing, Legal Truck Type 3, Total Axle Load= 13353.97kN
at 26th Load step ................................................................................................................ 41

ix
 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

According to the 2010 ERA Bridge Management System (BMS) Database there are
approximately 600 masonry and concrete arch highway bridges that are found in Ethiopia
road network according to the 2010. Almost all of these bridges were constructed in the
late 1930’s and are found to be in poor condition (ERA BMS,2010).Therefore, estimating
the load carrying capacity of arch bridges using the recommendations given in Ethiopian
Roads Authority Bridge Design Manual (ERA BDM,2013) is necessary.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

In order for arch bridges to keep serving for their intended design life and beyond, its
components should be assessed and well understood. In this regard, crack in arch barrel of
an arch have a decisive role that compromise their serviceability and strength feature.
Formation of cracks in the concrete undermine the engineering characteristic of load
bearing component by deteriorating the stiffness. Due to the lack of proper understanding
of the load carrying capacity of arch bridges, their assessment often is not carried out rather
destined to be replaced or demolished. Therefore, a thorough assessment of crack
formation should be conducted to estimate the safe load carrying capacity of arch bridges.
The assessment of arch bridge will ultimately affect the decision making that will not
compromise the safety of the users and saving increased cost incurred by their owners.

1.3 Objective

1.3.1 General Objective

The research described in this thesis aims to develop a numerical model for estimating the
load carrying capacity of arch bridge using a finite element analysis and extend the
procedure in determining the safe load carrying capacity of arch bridges found in the
federal road network of Ethiopia.
MSc Thesis Page 1
 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

1.3.2 Specific Objective

The specific objectives of this research study are outlined below:

1. To provide accurate load estimation method that represent the complex, nonlinear
relationship between the constituent materials and compressive strength of concrete
subject to an incremental stepped loading
2. To model the process using Midas FEA software and
3. To provide a comparison study to validate the assessment method.

1.4 Limitation of the Thesis

Due to the complexity and nature of the problem, the spandrel walls are not treated in this
study. In addition, the analysis is done only for the own weight of the bridge and moving
loads.

1.5 Organization of the Thesis

The thesis is organized in seven chapters.

Chapter 1 gives an introductory content that shows the aim of the thesis, limitation of the
study as well as the structure of the thesis.

Chapter 2 focuses on a detailed literature review where it covers the history of the design
and construction of arch bridges in Ethiopia and the world. In addition, this chapter covers
the different methods of load carrying capacity assessment methods by different
researchers, designers, and engineers.

Chapter 3 describes the studied bridge in relation to geometry and material properties.
Some findings on the bridge regarding maintenance or rehabilitation history, adaptations
made to the bridge is discussed.

Chapter 4 tries to present the failure criteria set to evaluate the response of the studied
bridge that is to be used in the analysis and result extraction.

In Chapter 5, the method and approach used in the modeling and analysis of the three-
dimensional model by using Midas FEA general-purpose software is discussed. A

MSc Thesis Page 2

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

validation of the method analysis used in this study is explained and illustrated in this
chapter.

Chapter 6 deals with the result and discussion. Here the results from the Midas FEA
software are analyzed and interpreted.

The last chapter gives conclusions and recommendations drawn from the study.

MSc Thesis Page 3

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 History of Arch Bridges

The application of arches to bridge structures came much later than girder and suspension
types, but an arch is the first and greatest of Man’s inventions in the field of structures
because arch transfers loads relating distinctively to its shape. The Sumerians, a society
that lived in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley, used sunbaked bricks for their main building
material. To span an opening, they relied on corbel construction techniques. Around 4000
BC, they discovered the advantages of arch shape in construction and began to build arch
entranceways and small arch bridges with their sunbaked bricks (Steinman and Watson,
1941).

Other communities with access to stone soon began to build arches with stone elements.
By the time of the Romans most bridges were constructed as stone arches, also known as
masonry or voussoir arches.

Figure 2-1 Pont du Gard Aqueduct, France (Chen and Duan)

Empirical rules were developed for dimensioning the shape of the arch and the wedge-
shaped stones. The Romans were magnificent builders and many of their masonry bridges
are still standing. Probably the most famous is the Pont du Gard at Nîmes in France (Figure
2-1), which was built shortly before the Christian era to allow the aqueduct of Nîmes
(which is almost 50 km long) to cross the Gard River. The Roman architects and hydraulic
engineers, who designed this bridge almost 50 m high with three levels, created a technical

MSc Thesis Page 4

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

as well as an artistic masterpiece. Excellent descriptions of other great Roman bridges can
be found in Steinman and Watson. (Steinman and Watson,1941).

In China, ancient stone arch bridges with many shapes and configurations are ubiquitous.
The Zhaozhou Bridge (Anji Bridge) shown in Figure 2-2 completed in 605 AD is the first
shallow segmental stone arch bridge and the first open-spandrel arch bridge in the
world(Qian ,1987).

Figure 2-2 Zhao Zhou Bridge, China (Qian,1987)

2.2 Arch Bridges in Ethiopia

A safe and efficient transport system is fundamental to the freedom, wellbeing, and
prosperity of a society. By their nature, bridges are essential elements in the road transport
networks of Ethiopia and are vital to their operation. Restrictions to the operation of
bridges or their closure can have effects beyond the immediate local disruption, including
undesirable health and safety, economic, environmental, and political consequences.

Until the launch of the Road Sector Development Program by Ethiopian Roads Authority,
many of the roads were constructed in the time of the Italian invasion where the dominant
proportion of bridges used for the crossing of obstruction, valleys, waterways, or stream
were of stone masonry and unreinforced concrete Arch bridges(http://www.era.gov.et).

Today the transport network in Ethiopia, as in many other countries, is under constant
pressure to expand and increase capacity, with related economic and environmental costs.
In this situation, the existing infrastructure must be used efficiently and to its full capacity.

MSc Thesis Page 5

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Careful management of existing bridge assets can only achieve this. Changes in the
requirements of the transport system and the gradual deterioration of existing structures in
service mean that there is a growing need to maintain, repair, widen, and strengthen bridges
over the coming decades. The success of this will be dependent on accurately determining
the needs of bridges, understanding how best to undertake and allocate resources for their
maintenance, repair, and renewal (ERA BMS,2010).

Masonry arch bridges can be viewed as among the most sustainable structures ever to have
been built. Many have already been in service for more than 70 years without significant
or no repair or strengthening works exceeding the design life requirements of modern
structures (ERA BMS,2010).

2.3 Analysis Methods

The study of masonry arch has been performed for hundreds of years. The design of arches
was based on the collapse mechanism and the thrust line following the shape of the arch
so that there is either no bending moment or a reduced bending moment in the arch
member. The shape of an arch can only satisfy one condition of loading without bending
moments being developed. Temperature changes creep, foundation movements and
imperfections must, however, introduce some bending in all but the three-hinged arch. In
a bridge structure, live loading will produce a varying distribution of loading which will
introduce bending. Clearly, the higher the proportion of dead loads the more nearly can
the arch be designed to be in pure compression.

To determine the load carrying capacity of masonry arch bridges, different analytical and
empirical methods give different results as well. Some empirical methods give
approximate values of the load carrying capacity. However, these methods are also based
on experimental techniques like laboratory tests or field tests. They usually have a form of
simple formulae. Example Military Engineering Experimental Establishment (MEXE)
method (ERA Bridge Design Manual, 2013).

2.3.1 Analytical Methods

As arches were the oldest structural systems used in buildings and bridges, understanding
their complex structural behavior was a great task. Afterward, the 17th-century arches
subjected to concentrated load were studied continuously rather than following the trial

MSc Thesis Page 6

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

and error approach. Failure of masonry arch can take various ways; it might result from
material failure (Compressive or crushing), bond failure (Joint Opening), or formation of
plastic hinge that will lead to the mechanism failure. Movement at the springing abutment
can sometimes lead to failure in the above forms.

In order to analyze, any structural system developing a suitable analytical model producing
the behavior of the subject form and loading is required. In the case of an arch, numerous
models have been developed for centuries ranging from the classical elastic methods to
the recent finite element methods.

Even though there are modern methods like finite element, engineers or designers still tend
to use simple methods to evaluate or assess the loading carrying capacities of the arch
under current traffic loading.

2.3.1.1 The Maximum Stress Analyses

The basic principle behind the use of stress analysis is to compare the results to the material
properties that could serve the purpose without exceeding the limiting values. Several
numerical models can be developed depending on the nature of the geometry, the effort
needed for computation, and the required level of accuracy. Here the maximum stress
values are sought that are of main concern, as there are limit states. These methods relate
mainly to single-span bridge structures or to multi-span structures treating each span
individually. Besides in its basic form, it is only analyzing a bare arch neglecting the
influence of the backfill. A possible way of considering soil influence is introducing
additional springs modeling lateral earth pressure proposed. (Martín-Caro et al, 2004)

This is a simple approach to analyze masonry arch spans by treating them as an arch rib
made of an elastic material. These assumptions make the solution procedure a typical
problem of a static calculation. Such a method gives reasonable results in cases when the
stresses resulting from the loads are relatively lower than the material strength.

The selection of a method for solving a given problem depends on statically determinacy
of the considered model. If it is statically determinate, (Figure 2-3(a)) it can be solved
formulating equilibrium equations for horizontal and vertical forces and bending moments.
However, in the case of a structure model that is statically indeterminate (Figure 2.3(c),
(d)) it is solved generally employing integration of equilibrium equations, force method,
or displacement method.

MSc Thesis Page 7

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Figure 2-3 Geometry models in maximum stress analyses: 3-pin (a, b), 2-pin (c) and fixed-
end arch rib (d) (Sustainable Bridges SB4.7.3)
In case of 2-pin arch scheme (Figure 2.3(b)), the problem can be reduced to the
determination of the horizontal force, H from (the bending moment in the cross-section of
the arch barrel, M , modulus of elasticity of the material, E, a moment of inertia of the arch
barrel cross-section, I and the displacement y as a function of distance, s) component at
springing from Eq 2-1:

( ) ( ) Eq 2-1
∫ ( )
=
( )
∫ ( )
Where,
H is the horizontal force
Mp is the bending moment
I is the moment of inertia of the section
E is the modulus of elasticity and
Y is the vertical displacement

The inelastic arch rib methods accommodate the possibility for taking into account non-
linear behavior of the arch material i.e. no resistance in tension and elastic-perfectly brittle
or elastic-perfectly plastic behavior in compression. The concept proposed (Brencich et al,
2004) is based on static calculation as the above method however it involves the
incremental procedure for loading and responding modification of the static scheme of the
model during the analysis.

MSc Thesis Page 8

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

The whole structure is divided into segments and calculations are carried out in the nodes
arising from the division. At every step of the solution procedure, an increment of the load
is applied and elastic analysis is performed giving as a result of internal forces in the nodes.
Then the height of the effective thickness xi of a section is calculated from the average
values of internal forces for both the section nodes. The effective thickness is established
according to the assumed approach i.e. neglecting the tensile zone and/or the crushed area.
In the next step, the geometry of the arch is updated: the section heights are equal to values
of xi and their axes are offset suitably (Figure 2-4). The entire length of the arch rib will
be analyzed in this procedure. The connections between the ends of adjacent segments are
infinitely rigid (Selby and Vecchio, 1993).

Figure 2-4 Location and variation of thrust line and Zone of Thrust in segments.
(Sustainable Bridges SB4.7.3)

2.3.1.2 The thrust line analyses

The thrust line analysis controls the location and slope of the thrust line within the arch
barrel. The analyzed parameter describing the location of the line of thrust can be an
eccentricity of the force resultant e, being a function of normal force N and bending
moment M acting in a considered cross-section. The slope of the thrust line is controlled
by means of a relationship between normal force N and shear force T. Depending on the
assumed theory and material model there are various limits for the line of thrust position.
Structure meeting these conditions for given loads is assumed to be safe

“The middle third rule” the earliest version of the line of thrust impose or restricts the
location of the resultant within the middle third of the section preventing tension to
develop. This criterion has been arrived from elastic theory. Such a strict limit makes the
method extremely conservative and at the same time is very difficult to achieve. It can be

MSc Thesis Page 9

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

satisfied only in cases when the structure has been properly designed and the dead loads
considerably dominate live loads.

Relaxing the above limit the “middle half rule” was in place increasing the section allowed
for compression reaching to reach half of the core.

The later limit of the method was proposed by Heyman 1966. He concluded that even if
the line of thrust runs outside the allowed core in one section it does not threaten the safety
of the whole structure. A structure will collapse only if the line of thrust reaches the edges
of the arch barrel at least in four sections that would convert it into mechanism. According
to this idea, the allowed space for the thrust line is the whole section of the arch barrel
what can be written as:

Eq 2-2
= ≤
2

Where,

M is the bending moment

N is the thrust
d is the cross-section thickness

In the last approach, an important assumption is an infinite material compression strength,

which enables the line of thrust to lie just at the edge of a cross-section. This presumption
is rather not realistic but in most masonry bridge structures mean stresses are relatively
low and the real solution is very near to the one obtained in this way (Sustainable Bridge
SB7.4.3).

All the variants for the thrust line location can be summarized by employing the so-called
‘geometric factor of safety’ (Heyman, 1966). This factor is defined as the ratio between
the actual arch barrel thickness and the minimum thickness of a similar arch
accommodating the line of thrust from a given set of loads. According to this definition, a
structure with a load giving the thrust line satisfying the limit of “middle third rule” has a
geometric factor of safety equal to 3(Sustainable Bridge SB7.4.3).

MSc Thesis Page 10

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

2.3.1.3 Zone of thrust

This method is similar to the line of thrust analysis with the only difference where limit
over the indefinite strength of the material is imposed. Here the material compressive
strength is definite and limited. The position of the resultant cannot be at the edge of the
arch rib rather a rectangular area with the arch section.

It is based on the elastic-plastic material model. The method permits the creation of a
rectangular ‘yield block’ around the point of the force resultant position (Figure 2-5).
According to the method assumptions, the force resultant lies in the middle of that yield
area. The height of the yield block t is equal to the minimal one providing transmitting the
normal force N at the given material strength fc and an arch barrel width B what can be
written as:

Eq 2-3
=
.
Where,
N is normal force
fc is material compressive strength
B is barrel width

Figure 2-5 Stress Block in the Zone of Thrust (Sustainable Bridges SB4.7.3)
The resultant force at every section of the arch shall not be close to the edge less than half
of the yield block, t/2. This controlled the failure of the arch from going into mechanism.
(Sustainable Bridges SB4.7.3)

− Eq 2-4
= ≤
Where,
M is the bending moment

MSc Thesis Page 11

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

N is the normal force

d is thickness of cross section
t is the yield (compression) block depth

2.3.1.4 The Mechanism method

The mechanism method is a kinematic approach where it assumes the formation of enough
hinges for collapse. A specific approach to the analysis of masonry arches presents a group
of the mechanism methods. On the contrary, to the previously mentioned lower bound
analyses, these methods are based on the upper bound approach and hence are used only
in a limit analysis giving a load carrying capacity and a failure mode of a structure. The
algorithm of the methods applies to the kinematic approach. It uses an assumption, which
has been confirmed in numerous experimental tests, that a masonry arch becomes a
mechanism when at least four plastic hinges appear it the arch barrel (Heyman, 1966).
However, the position of the hinges is unknown and hence it has to be assumed or
calculated.

One of the most representative methods developed during the eighteenth century was
couplet’s Mechanism Method (Heyman, 1966). His contribution was outstanding with
clear ideas about the line of thrust and mechanisms of collapse caused by the formation of
hinges. Later in the last quarter of the eighteenth century, a young man called Coulomb
concluded that if friction is high preventing sliding between blocks the only possible mode
of failure is the formation of hinges in the arch rib (Heyman, 1966). In his conclusion,
Coulomb stated for equilibrium to be satisfied one should keep the line of thrust within the
arch rib that will ensure stability for a given loading situation.

In a simplified approach, the positions of the first three hinges under a single concentrated
load can be assumed to be one right under the load and the other two at springing
(Abutments). Looking for the best mechanism mode various hinge locations should be
taken until the minimum load is found that would result in a mechanism. This could be
achieved by equilibrium seeking moment at the hinges at an arbitrary location on the arch
equating it to zero or with the equation of virtual work method (Sustainable Bridges
SB4.7.3).

MSc Thesis Page 12

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Figure 2-6 Collapse Mechanism of an Arch (Heyman J.)

2.3.2 Semi-Empirical Methods

2.3.2.1 MEXE method

The MEXE (Military Engineering Experimental Establishment) method is a semi-
empirical method, which was developed during the Second World War. This method was
traditionally used to determine the capacity appraisal of masonry arch bridges. The MEXE
method comprises the calculation of a provisional axle load (PAL) that relates to the
performance of a ‘standard’ arch barrel using either a nomogram given in Ethiopian Road
Authority (ERA) Bridge Design Manual: for Determining the Provisional Axle Loading
of Masonry Arch Bridges before Factoring or the equation:

( + ) Eq 2-5
= .
( )
Where:
PAL is the provisional axle load
d is crown thickness
h is height of fill above crown
L is the arch span

This is an idealized load; it is valid for structures satisfying the assumption that the arch
span has a parabolic shape and is in the ideal condition. However, the method provides
also the load carrying capacity for differently shaped and deteriorated structures. The
modified MEXE method is a comprehensive method for determining the carrying capacity
of single-span stone and masonry arches in terms of allowable axle weights. The method
as such is concerned solely with the strength of the arch barrel and takes account of the
materials, various defects, and geometric proportions, which affect the strength of the arch.

MSc Thesis Page 13

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Figure 2-7 Arch Dimension and Description (ERA Bridge Design Manual 2013)

The provisional axle loading PAL is obtained by reference to the nomogram in Figure 2-8.
Mark the arch span L on Column A and the total crown thickness (d + h) (where d is barrel
and h is fill height) on Column B. Line through these points to Column C, and read off the
provisional axle loading assessment in tones. Alternatively, the provisional axle loading
shall be obtained by substituting the values of (d + h) and L in the above equation 2.5. The
maximum value should not exceed 70 in the case of PAL determined from the equation
Eq 2-5 (ERA Bridge Design manual, 2013).

After determining PAL (Provision axle load) factors accounting for the material properties,
the condition of the bridge and geometric parameters like the ratio of the span to rise ration
will be applied.

MSc Thesis Page 14

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Figure 2-8 Nomogram for Determining the Provisional Axle Loading of Masonry
arch bridge before factoring

2.4 Numerical Analysis (Software Programs)

2.4.1 3D Non-Linear Finite Element Model Systems

The finite element method (FEM) can be a program that is developed to handle the analysis
of any type of structure. The use of FEM can be most appreciated when the modeling is

MSc Thesis Page 15

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

done in the utmost care and in a good way. Depending upon the type of the problem, one,
two or three-dimensional elements can be used to model the given problem. As the model
construction is the difficult and time-consuming routine activity in FEM, care must be
exercised to achieve a more refined model with a shorter computational time that will
create a balance in our model. The FEM makes use of different material properties
modeled together that could help study the behaviors of each element in the model as
needed. More complex modeling approaches are usually indispensable for considering
some types of defects but on the other hand, sometimes increasing the dimension of
elements does not give any additional information. That is why the right selection of the
modeling technique is crucial (Sustainable Bridges SB4.7.3).

The methods mentioned earlier have been widely used for analyzing arch bridges because
no complicated computations are required. However, those methods were based on many
assumptions, which might affect the overall results of the ultimate load carrying capacity
of the bridge.

The main advantage of the finite element analysis is the opportunity to model a whole
structure including spandrel walls, wing walls, and abutments. To check the structural
vulnerability only the behavior of the arch is considered but also the backfill and abutment
are also analyzed. Additional modes of failure like longitudinal cracking of the arch barrel
or spandrel walls separation cab be predicted. In terms of loads, further to static loads,
dynamic and seismic loads can be implemented in the FEM. This also allows for
differential settlement and soil-structure interaction (Sustainable Bridges SB4.7.3).

MSc Thesis Page 16

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

CHAPTER 3

DESCRIPTION OF STUDIED BRIDGE

The bridge under investigation is found on a road which is part of the Ethiopian Roads
Authority federal road network, that connects the town of Komobolcha to Mille town.
According to the Ethiopian Roads Authority Bridge management database (ERA BMS,
2010), the bridge is identified as Bridge No. B11-01-015. It was constructed during the
Italian occupation 1939(ERA BMS ,2010). The bridge construction industry was a new
introduction to the country as the main construction material was concrete which is not
practiced mainly in Ethiopia prior to the Italian occupation. The bridge was constructed
out of plain concrete without having reinforcements (ERA BMS,2010).

The bridge is a single-span arch with a stone masonry spandrel wall and backfill. The
bridge has two-lanes with an out-to-out width of 9m, and a carriageway width of 7m,
having a span of 22.50m. The thickness of the concrete arch rib/barrel is 1.40m and resting
on stone masonry abutment which is founded on basaltic rock. There is no record of design
nor working drawings for the bridge.

3.1 Construction of the bridge

Odie bridge was constructed out of plain concrete [evidence observed on demolished or
collapsed arch bridges of similar nature and year of construction along the Kombolcha -
Bati-Mile Road] dominantly with an aggregate of relatively larger size compared to the
construction material choice practiced these days. At the time of the Italian annexation of
Ethiopia, the road construction using locally available material was utilized.

Odie bridge abutments were constructed using poorly dressed stones with varying sizes.
The spandrel walls were also poorly dressed stones cemented in mortar that rest on the
extrados of the arch rib. The approach wing walls on both sides of the bridge are cemented
stone masonry walls. The parapet walls on both sides of the bridge are extension of the
spandrel wall made of a cemented stone masonry wall with a thin layer of mortar coping.

MSc Thesis Page 17

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Figure 3-1 Bridge Profile of Odie Bridge (ERA BMS, 2010)

MSc Thesis Page 18

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Figure 3-2 The Odie Bridge

3.2 Maintenance history of the bridge

As per Ethiopian Roads Authority Bridge Management System 2010 (ERA BMS,2010),
no major maintenance or repair history is found expect for additional bituminous surfacing
and reconstruction of part of the parapet wall (ERA BMS,2010).

Figure 3-3 Reconstruction of the part of the parapet wall

MSc Thesis Page 19

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

3.3 Inspection of the bridge

During inspection, it is observed that few areas of the intrados were deteriorated due to
aging and effloresce effect. Moreover, damage to the parapet wall due to vehicles collision
has been observed.

Figure 3-4 Damage by vehicle Collison on Parapet walls

3.4 Dimensions of the Odie Bridge

The detailed dimension of the bridge is shown in Figure 3-5.

0.96m 1.40m

8.61m

6.25m

R12.37m

21.50m

Figure 3-5 Odie Bridge Geometry

MSc Thesis Page 20

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

3.5 Compressive strength of Concrete

Due to a lack of design and related documents of the bridge, a survey to assess the residual
strength of the bridge materials was done using a non-destructive test. For the capacity
assessment of the bridge, the compressive strength was one of the center points of interest.
The measured rebound strength test was tabulated under Appendix A. The characteristic
compressive strength of the five sets of tests were calculated using probabilistic approach
with 5 % of the population of all possible strength determinations of the volume of concrete
under consideration, are expected to fall. (Eurocode EN1991-1, 2000, EN206-1, 2002)

Table 3-1: Characteristic Compressive Strength of the Concrete Sets

Set Characteristic Strength, MPa
1 65.636
2 29.983
3 48.194
4 32.370
5 50.259

The characteristic strength of concrete can be taken value excluding the highest and the
lowest value recorded during test. Hence, it can be concluded that the characteristic
compressive strength of the bridge can be taken as varying between 29 MPa and 50.2 MPa.

However, according to the Ethiopian Roads Authority bridge design Manual 2013(ERA
BSM, 2013) it is stated that the strength of sound concrete shall be assumed to be equal to
either the values taken from the plans and specifications or the average of construction test
values. When these values are not available, the ultimate stress of sound concrete shall be
assumed to be 25 MPa. A reduced ultimate strength shall be assumed (no less than 15
MPa, however) for unsound or deteriorated concrete unless evidence to the contrary is
gained by field-testing (ERA Bridge Design Manual, 2013).

In line with the Ethiopian Roads Authority bridge design manual (ERA Bridge Design
Manual, 2013), the cubic compressive concrete strength is of 25MPa is used.

MSc Thesis Page 21

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

CHAPTER 4

FAILURE CRITERIA
Introduction

The behavior and strength of concrete mostly are described as having low tensile strength
which results in a tensile crack at a very low tensile stress compared with higher strength
in compression. The formation of cracks affects the stiffness of the concrete that give rise
to a nonlinear behavior in concrete structures like panel and shells, where developing an
accurate and simplified mathematical model is the most important task. Many researchers
have developed different linear-elastic fracture models to study the nonlinear response of
concrete in structures (Chen and Han,1988).

The strength of concrete under multiaxial stresses is a function of the state of stress and
cannot be predicted by the limitation of simple tensile, compressive, and shearing stresses
in relation to each other (Wai-Fah, 2014).

Failure criteria a general term in its sense where used for concrete under combined states
of stress. In formulating the criteria for concrete, one must come to the physical meaning
of failure under a combined state of stress. Different criteria such as yielding, setting of
cracking, crushing, and the deformation has been used to define failure. In general,
concrete failures can be grouped into tensile and compressive types, characterized by
brittleness and ductility, respectively. Tension failure is defined by the formation of major
cracks and loss of tensile strength in concrete normal to the crack orientation. In
compressive failure, many small cracks develop, and most of the concrete elements lose
its strength.

Failure of concrete under general stress has long been based on the well-known coulomb
criterion combined with a small tension cutoff. The actual behavior and strength of
concrete material are very complex, however, and it depends, among many factors, on the
physical and mechanical properties of the components of concrete. Concrete shows many
load-carrying capacity values when subject to different conditions. Idealizations are
therefore important to develop a simple mathematical model for practical application.
(Wai-Fah, 2014).

MSc Thesis Page 22

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

In this study, simplified failure models or criteria are applied to predict the behavior and
strength of concrete under given loading conditions.

Total Strain Crack Model

The tensile behavior of concrete can be modeled using different approaches, one resulting
in a more complex description than the other. For the Total Strain crack model, four
softening functions based on fracture energy are implemented, a linear softening curve, an
exponential softening curve, the nonlinear softening curve according to (Reinhardt et al.,
and the nonlinear softening curve according to Hordijk, all related to a crack bandwidth as
is usual in crack models. Tensile behavior which is directly related to the fracture energy
can also be modeled within the Total Strain concept using tension softening function
(Midas FEA,2016).

Figure 4-1 Hordijk Tension Softening Curve (Midas FEA, 2016)

The constitutive model for the concrete response to the compression is based on the
Thorenfeldt method. The inbuilt function is defined in the software that takes into account
the compressive strength of the concrete in the formation of the stiffness matrix (Midas
FEA,2016).

Figure 4-2 Thorenfeldt Compression mode for Concrete (Midas FEA, 2016)

MSc Thesis Page 23

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

In this study, numerical modeling was carried out by using a commercially available
advanced nonlinear finite element program, Midas FEA. The total strain crack model was
considered to capture the nonlinear response of concrete under loading.

The total strain crack model implemented in Midas FEA reflects all the ultimate states of
materials such as cracking and crushing and shear failure defined through the relationship
between shear stress and shear strain. Compressive strength, tensile strength and shear
model implemented is defined as thus (Vecchio and Collins, 1986).

The established relation in understanding the behavior of the smeared crack is represented
series of micro cracks. After cracking, the elastic modulus of the concrete element is
reduced to zero in the direction parallel to the principal tensile stress direction. Crushing
occurs when all principal stresses are compressive and lie outside the failure surface;
subsequently, the elastic modulus is reduced to zero in all direction normal. This is well
illustrated by the powerful features of the Midas FEA software (Midas FEA, 2016).

MSc Thesis Page 24

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

CHAPTER 5

FEM SIMULATION OF ODIE BRIDGE

In this section, the research approach used to carry out the study is presented. The
necessary steps used to carry out the investigations, the assumptions and simplifications
used to simulate the realistic site and bridge condition are also discussed in this chapter.

5.1 Finite Element Model Using Midas FEA

The finite element analysis of this study is carried out using a very versatile finite element
analysis software for Civil Structures called Midas FEA. This program has a user-friendly
interface that enables the creation of the three-dimensional model of the structure to be
simulated. The bridge geometry is created in a separate AutoCAD program and imported
as dxf (Drawing eXchange Format) file into main Midas FEA software and latter improved
using a graphical interface.

The main purpose of generating this model is to study the behavior of the arch in response
to the self-weight of the bridge and vehicular moving load. In the analysis, own weight of
the bridge is calculated from the material definition and geometry of the structure. The
moving load is then applied at a stationery point directly on the critical point based on the
influence surface.

5.2 Validation

For Validation purpose, the Prestwood bridge shown in Figure 5-1 is simulated in Midas
FEA software and the output is compared with the test result for validation of the model.
The bridge is a single-span bridge tested to collapse within the experimental research on
masonry bridges supported by the Transport Research Laboratory (Page, 1987).

Prestwood Bridge

The Prestwood bridge is a single-span arch bridge with backfill. The bridge has a uniform
arch thickness of 0.22m. The span length of the bridge was 6.55m and with a rise of 1.43m
and a fill depth of 0.16m above the crown. The experimental load was applied on a strip
of the road surface along the full width of the bridge between the parapets at a point where

MSc Thesis Page 25

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

the lower load value leading to the failure was expected. The latter has been evaluated by
assuming that the arch would fail as a four hinged mechanism and was, then, applied at
the quarter-span of the bridge (Page, 1987).

Figure 5-1 Prestwood Bridge before Collapse (Sustainable Bridges SB4.7.3)

The strip was 0.30 m wide to distribute the load and to avoid premature failure of the fill.
The load has been applied using hydraulic jacks, while the required reaction for the load
was provided by the weight of concrete blocks on a steel frame above the bridge (Figure
5-4). The collapse load was recorded as 228kN that formed four hinges failing by
mechanism (Page, J. 1987).

Figure 5-2 Geometry of Prestwood bridge (Page ,1987)

MSc Thesis Page 26

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Study of Prestwood Bridge as Total Strain Crack Model

A finite element model of Prestwood bridge was generated for the estimation its load-
carrying capacity. The interface between the arch and the fill was modeled using contact
friction with a single face contract. The backfill material was idealized as the Mohr-
Coulomb model. The boundary conditions were defined as rollers for the backfill and
pinned restraints for the arch connection to the foundation. A rigid block with very high
stiffness was used to model and simulate the loading apparatus. The analytical model was
developed utilizing the material properties of the bridge reported in the TRRL Research
Report 110, (Page, 1987).

Figure 5-3 FE Model of Prestwood Bridge.

Density Compressive E, Poison’s The Cohesion

Property
Strength, fc young’s Ratio angle of
Modulus Internal
Component
friction
Arch 2040kg/m3 4.5 N/mm2 15GPa 0.3 - -
Backfill 2040kg/m3 - 0.3GPa 0.3 37 7 kPa

Based on the finite element analysis output, the load that resulted in the formation of the
fourth hinge directly under the applied load that leads to mechanism in the bridge is 225kN.
This value corresponds to 98% of the collapse load of Prestwood Bridge obtained in the
experimental test(228kN). This could be attributed to the fact that the load is in Prestwood
bridge is a single load at a fixed position that does not require the use of influence surfaces.
It can be concluded that the total strain crack model used to estimate the load carrying
capacity of arch bridges and hence similar approach can be used to analyze the Odie
bridge.

MSc Thesis Page 27

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Figure 5-4 Prestwood Bridge: Mechanism (Page,1987)

The vertical displacement under the test line load was recorded by the acoustic
measurement and was reported during the test (Page, 1987). The vertical displacement
under the incremental step load in the total strain crack model is plotted and shown in
Figure 5-5. The results from the finite element analysis show a close correlation in the
vertical displacement up to a load of 150kN.

250

200

150
Load, kN

Test Data

100 Total Strain Crack Model

50

0
-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Vertical Displacement , mm

Figure 5-5 Vertical displacements of Point Under loading for Prestwood Bridge
(Positive Displacement shown indicate downward displacement)

MSc Thesis Page 28

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

5.3 Odie Bridge

The Odie Bridge is drawn in the AutoCAD environment and imported to Midas FEA
software.

In Figure 5-6 ,the arch bridge, backfill and boundary conditions are displayed. The finite
element model has three parts pavement, arch rib, and backfill. The boundary conditions
are assigned to the springing point as pinned, and the backfill is assigned as rollers in the
different degrees of freedom.

Pavement

Arch
Backfill

Figure 5-6 Boundary Condition of Odie Bridge

Using the given initial boundary conditions and initial stress conditions, the body force as
own weight is activated with moving loads fed to the software, the modeling process ends.
The arch and backfill are subjected to concentrated loads at the influence surface points.
The moving load is acted to the backfill material that serves as distributing it thought the
fill. The load consists of full sets of axles and are subdivided into load steps at equal
intervals.

The influence surfaces at different points on the arch are shown in Figure 5-7 to Figure
5-9.

MSc Thesis Page 29

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Figure 5-7 Influence surface for solid stress at the Springing point

Figure 5-8 Influence surface for solid stress at the Quarter point

Figure 5-9 Influence surface for solid stress at Crown

MSc Thesis Page 30

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

The Arch Rib

An 8 node solid elements with mid nodes were used to model the arch rib, backfill, and
abutment. The spandrel wall confinement effect was not taken into account due to the
strengthening effect of this analysis. The material model that best represents the model is
assigned while developing the model.

A finite element analysis requires the division of elements to idealize a real problem to the
numerical model. This requires the generation of mesh to suitably discretize in the shape
and size of each element in a model and hence the meshing done automatically. However,
the quality of the auto-meshed elements is checked and verified to achieve good quality in
the results. During the meshing process, a well-organized node-to-node connection is be
checked to reduces the computation time that might arise from a very large matrix. Figure
5-10 shows the final discretization of the bridge.

Figure 5-10 Final discretization using Auto-Mesh Finite Element Model of the Bridge

The Backfill

The backfill is considered as an elasto-plastic material with the Mohr-Columb material

model. The specification of this model and its yield criterion typically involves Coulomb’s
theory, which establishes a linear relationship between shear strength on a plane and the
normal stress acting on it (Midas FEA,2016, Bowles,1997).

MSc Thesis Page 31

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

The pavement

The pavement thickness is very small compared to the backfill and the arch and hence its
effect in load distribution are insignificant. The pavement load is considered as a
distributed load on the top backfill surface.

5.4 Modeling of the Bridge of Odie Bridge

The behavior of concrete under loading is very complex. A non-linear analysis is required
to capture the response of concrete under different sets of loads.

To perform the analysis of the model, the following steps are used:

1) Complete geometric generation of the model using line, surface, and solid
elements.
2) The arch and the backfill are represented using 8 nodes solid element with node-
to-node connectivity that allows smooth shape function between elements in the
mesh.

The system of the element, boundary conditions, and node connectivity is sufficiently
detailed to properly simulate the complex interaction of the element subjected to a set of
loads. This will help to determine the element stress, the crack status, and the crack
propagation in the arch section from the applied traffic load.

Material properties in the model

The fracture energy of the concrete Gf, is the energy required to propagate a tensile crack
of unit area. According to CEB-FIB Model Code 90, the fracture energy for concrete is
80Nm/m2.

Table 5-1 Material Properties of arch Concrete

Density Compressive Tensile E, Poison’s Tensile
Strength, fc Strength, ft Young’s Ratio Fracture
Arch
Modulus Energy,
Concrete
Gf
2400kg/m3 20 N/mm2 1.54N/mm2 21.46GPa 0.2 80Nm/m2
(Ethiopian Roads Authority Bridge Design manual, 2013 and CEB-FIP MODEL CODE
1990)

MSc Thesis Page 32

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

The concrete is modeled as a - material with hardening and softening curve as suggested
by Thorenfeldt et. al (Midas FEA, 2016). The tension behavior is modeled as non-linear
softening using fracture energy. The backfill is modelled as C-ϕ material using Mohr-
Coloumb material model (Midas FEA,2016).

Table 5-2 Material Properties of Backfill

Young Poisson’s Angle of internal

Density
Modulus Ratio friction
Backfill
1800 kg/m3 0.2GPa 0.30 35
(Ethiopian Roads Authority Bridge Design manual, 2013 and Bowles,1997)

5.5 Loading

For the assessment of load carrying capacity of the bridge, the legal truck loads shown in
Figure 5-11, Figure 5-12 and Figure 5-13 are used (ERA Bridge Design manual, 2013).

Figure 5-11 Truck Type 3 Unit Weight = 227 kN

Figure 5-12 Truck Type 3-2 Unit Weight = 325 kN

MSc Thesis Page 33

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Figure 5-13 Truck Type 3-3 Unit Weight = 364 kN

Impact factor

Impact from the vehicles are included in the analysis for the bridge under investigation. A
smooth deck condition is assumed. In this case, an impact factor of 0.1 is used (ERA
Bridge Design manual, 2013). The legal truck positions are on Odie Bridge are shown in
Figure 5-14 to Figure 5-17.

5.6 Analysis

In the analysis steps following two stages are used

1) The response of the bridge from its own weight will be analyzed and stored for the
next stage
2) The bridge is analyzed to check its response towards the formation of the first hinge
mechanism and the load that causes it to go into a mechanism. In this case the
maximum load that causes plastic hinge is obtained.

73 77 77
kN kN kN

4.5m 1.2m

Arch
Backfill

Figure 5-14 Loading at Quarter Point, Legal Truck Type-3

MSc Thesis Page 34

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

73 77 77
kN kN kN

4.5m 1.2m

Arch
Backfill

Figure 5-15 Loading at Crown, Legal Truck Type-3

45 70 70 70 70
kN kN kN kN kN
1.2m
3.3m 6.6m 1.2m

Arch
Backfill

Figure 5-16 Loading at Quarter Point, Legal Truck Type-3-2

45 70 70 70 70
kN kN kN kN kN
1.2m
3.3m 6.6m 1.2m

Arch
Backfill

Figure 5-17 Loading at Crown, Legal Truck Type-3-2

MSc Thesis Page 35

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Analysis solution

In nonlinear analysis, the total load applied to a finite element model is divided into a series
of load increments called load steps. At the completion of each incremental solution, the
stiffness matrix of the model is adjusted to reflect nonlinear changes in structural stiffness
before proceeding to the next load increment. The Midas FEA has an iteration procedure
for find solution. Newton–Raphson equilibrium iterations for updating the model stiffness.
In this study, for the concrete solid elements, convergence criteria were based on energy,
and the convergence tolerance limits were based on the default set by the program. It was
found that convergence of solutions for the models was difficult to achieve due to the
nonlinear behavior of reinforced concrete. Therefore, the convergence tolerance limits
were increased to a maximum of 0.1 which is 10 times default tolerance limits (0.01) to
obtain convergence of the solutions.

MSc Thesis Page 36

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

CHAPTER 6

RESULT and DISCUSSION

Mainly the analysis is targeting in finding the crack pattern and its growth for the selected
section that changes its material properties as the stress in each section changes depending
on the material non-linearity defined in the modeling process.

The stress in the arch responding in a non-linearly for each load step is defined as the
moving traffic load. The crack growth and its orientation are fixed in the material model
and hence the definition of the section for failure is carefully investigated for its effect in
the length and extent of the crack. As the stress in the arch increase with cumulating
loadings at consecutive load steps the crack opens and reaching the outermost section of
the arch will be reported as the highest load that creates a hinge in the cross section. Here
the maximum load that the arch can sustain just before the collapse is the one which caused
all the four hinges to form.

From the analysis for legal truck type 3, the first hinge was formed at the quarter point of
the arch under the center of gravity of the axles with corresponding load of 2824.87kN.
The second hinge formed at the springing point with corresponding load of 4622.52kN.
The third hinge and the fourth hinge formed with corresponding load of 6163.36kN and
6933.78kN respectively. The locations of the plastic hinges are shown in Figure 6-1 to
Figure 6-7. Moreover, the load-displacement diagram of the first hinge at the quarter point
on arch is shown in Figure 6-5.

Figure 6-1 Hinge No.1 at Quarter Point, Legal Truck Type 3, Total Axle Load= 2824.87kN
at 11th Load step

MSc Thesis Page 37

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Figure 6-2 Hinge No.2 at Right Springing Point, Legal truck Type 3, Total Axle
Load=4622.52 kN at 18th Load step

Figure 6-3 Hinge No.3 at Three Quarter Point, Legal truck Type 3, Total Axle
Load=6163.36 kN at 24th Load step

Figure 6-4 Hinge No.4 at Left Springing Point, Legal truck Type 3, Total Axle
Load=6933.78kN at 27th Load step

MSc Thesis Page 38

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

The vertical displacement of the in Figure 6-5 shows that at the formation of the first hinge
the displacement value shows a sudden increase for a very small load increment.

8000

7000

6000

5000
Load kN

4000

3000
Quarter Point

2000

1000

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Vertical Displacement (mm)

Figure 6-5 Vertical Displacement of quarter-point on arch under the Load for Legal Truck
Load type 3

The load before the formation of the first hinge can be taken as the safest load that the arch
can sustain. In this case, 2824.87kN is the maximum total axle load Odie Bridge can carry.

Based on the recommendations given, the rating factor (safety factor) is computed using
the following equation (Eq 6-1):

∅ −∑ × −∑ ( + ) Eq 6-1
=
( + )
(ERA BDM,2013)

Where: RF = rating factor (the portion of the rating Legal Truck allowed on the bridge)
ϕ = resistance factor
m = number of elements included in the dead load
Rn = nominal resistance
n = number of live loads other than the rating vehicle
γiD= dead load factor for element “i”
Di = nominal dead load effect of element “i”

MSc Thesis Page 39

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

γjL= live load factor for live load “j” other than the rating vehicle(s)
Lj = nominal traffic live load effects for load “j” other than the rating vehicle(s)
γLR= live load factor for rating Legal Truck
LR = nominal live load effect for the rating Legal Truck
I = live load impact factor

Hence, the rating factor of Odie bridge for the legal truck type 3 is 3.14.

Similarly, the legal truck was positioned at the crown and the results of this configuration
first hinge formed with corresponding load of 6676.97kN. The second hinge formed at the
springing point with corresponding load of 13353.97kN. Hence, the third and the
formation of the fourth hinge were irrelevant as the second hinge formed for load the crown
is far greater than the formation of a fourth hinge in the load positioned at the quarter-point
for the legal truck type 3. The locations of the plastic first and second hinges are shown in
Figure 6-6 and Figure 6-7.

Figure 6-6 Hinge No.1 at Load at Crown, Legal Truck Type 3, Total Axle Load=6676.97kN
at 13th Load step

MSc Thesis Page 40

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Figure 6-7 Hinge No.2 at Springing, Legal Truck Type 3, Total Axle Load= 13353.97kN at
26th Load step

With regard to this, the quarter-point loading is more critical than the crown point loading.
Hence, the load carrying capacity of the is controlled by the quarter point loading with
capacity to sustain 6676.973kN with a rating factor (safety factor) of 7.42 based on Eq 6-1.

Due to the loading arrangement and spacing of the axles the legal truck type 3-2 is not the
critical vehicle type for the case study. The first hinge formed at the quarter-point at a total
axle load of 53539.158kN. This load is unrealistically very high due to the balancing effect
of the axle arrangement on the influence surface and the arch thickness being very large.

MSc Thesis Page 41

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

CHAPTER 7

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 Conclusion

Arch bridges show rather complex behavior when subjected any loading condition
especially under moving traffic loading. Based on the research conducted, the following
conclusions are drawn,

 Odie Bridge can carry a maximum total axle load of 282ton with the least favorable
condition (Legal Type 3).
 The methodology proposed for the evaluation of the load carrying capacity of arch
bridge is a more realistic and a good approximation.
 In the absence of as built drawings and detailed test data, estimation of load
carrying capacity of arch bridges is difficult.

7.2 Recommendation

 In the assessment of arch bridges, spandrel walls should be considered.

 The effect of seismic and environmental loads needs to be considered for future
study.

MSc Thesis Page 42

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

REFERENCES

Blake L S. (2001) Civil Engineer’s Reference book 4th Edition, Butterworth-

Heinemann, Linacre House, Jordan Hill, Oxford.

Bowles Joseph E., RE., S. (1997), Foundation Analysis and Design (5th Edition),
McGraw-Hill, Singapore

Brencich A & de Francesco U (2004) Assessment of Multispan Masonry Arch Bridges:

Simplified Approach. ASCE Journal of Bridge Engineering.

Bridle, R. J. and Hughes T. G. ,(1990) “An energy method for arch bridge analysis."
Proc. Inst. Civ. Engrs, London.

C.E.I.D.B. (1990), 'CEB-FIB Model Code 1990: Design Code, Thomas Telford
Services Ltd, Switzerland

EN 1992-1-1:2004 (2004), Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures. Part 1: General

rules and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels

EN206-1-Part 1(2000): Specification, performance, production, and conformity.

European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.

ERA BDM, Bridge Design Manual, (2013), Ethiopian Roads Authority, Ethiopia.

ERA BMS: ERA Bridge Management System (BMS), (2010), Ethiopian Roads
Authority, Ethiopia.

Heyman J .(1966) The stone skeleton. Structural Engineering of Masonry Architecture,

University of Cambridge, Cambridge.

Highway structures: Inspection and maintenance Assessment of highway bridges and

structures. (2001) DMRB Volume 3 Section 4 Part 4 (BA 16/97). Highway Agency,
London: HMSO.

Martín-Caro JA & Martínez LJ (2004) A first-level structural analysis tool for the
Spanish Railways Masonry Arch Bridges. Arch Bridges IV – Advances in Assessment,
Structural Design, and Construction, P Roca & C Molings (Eds), CIMNE, Barcelona,
pp 192–201

Midas FEA (2016). User manual version 2016, Midas IT, Seuol, South Korea

Page, J. (1987). Load tests to collapse on two arch bridges at Preston, Shropshire, and
Prestwood, Staffordshire. Crowthorne, England.

Pippard A. J. S. (1948) "The approximate estimation of safe loads on masonry

bridges." Civil Engineer in War, Vol 1, 365. Inst. Civ. Engrs, London.

Qian, L. X. (1987). The carrying capacity of Zhao Zhou stone arch bridge. J. Chinese
Civil Engineering., 4, pp. 831-843

MSc Thesis Page 43

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Selby, R.G, and Vecchio, F.J. (1993) 3D Constitutive Relations for Reinforced
Concrete, Tech, Rep.93-02, Department of Civil Engineering, Toronto, Canada

Steinman, D. B., and Watson, S.R. (1941). Bridge and Their Builder, G.P. Putnam’s
Sons, New York, NY.

Sustainable Bridge SB4.7.3, (2007), Methods of analysis of damaged masonry arch

bridges, Background document, Sustainable Bridges.

Vecchio, F.J., and Collins, M.P. (1986) 'The Modified compression field theory for
reinforced concrete elements subjected to shear’, ACI Journal 83,22, 219-231.

Wai-Fah Chen and Han D.J (1988). Plasticity for Structural Engineers, Springer-
Verlag, New York, NY.

Wai-Fah Chen and Lian Duan. (2014) Bridge Engineering Handbook-Superstructure

Design, Second Edition, CRC Taylor & Francis Group.

MSc Thesis Page 44

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

APPENDIX A

Estimation of Concrete Strength from the Schmidt Hammer Test

The summary of sample sets at different representative spots on the arch rib

At Springing Left Abutment 1

Compressive
Strength Standard
Count/Tests Rebound (MPa) Mean x-mean (x-mean)2 Deviation
1 56 73 -4.000 16.000
2 58 77 0.000 0.000
3 56 73 77 -4.000 16.000 6.923
4 56 73 -4.000 16.000
5 64 89 12.000 144.000

Characteristic Strength as per EN 206-1:2000 at 65.63MPa

At Springing Right Abutment 1

Compressive
Strength Standard
Count/Tests Rebound (MPa) Mean x-mean (x-mean)2 Deviation
6 34 31 -11.400 129.960
7 42 45 2.600 6.760
8 46 52 42.4 9.600 92.160 7.569
9 40 42 -0.400 0.160
10 40 42 -0.400 0.160

Characteristic Strength as per EN 206-1:2000 at 29.98MPa

MSc Thesis Page 45

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

At Springing Left Abutment 2

Compressive
Strength Standard
Count/Tests Rebound (MPa) Mean x-mean (x-mean)2 Deviation
11 44 49 -16.800 282.240
12 52 65 -0.800 0.640
13 52 65 65.8 -0.800 0.640 10.733
14 56 73 7.200 51.840
15 58 77 11.200 125.440

Characteristic Strength as per EN 206-1:2000 at 48.19MPa

At Springing Right Abutment 2

Compressive
Strength Standard
Count/Tests Rebound (MPa) Mean x-mean (x-mean)2 Deviation
16 36 34 -9.000 81.000
17 40 42 -1.000 1.000
18 40 42 43 -1.000 1.000 6.480
19 42 45 2.000 4.000
20 46 52 9.000 81.000

Characteristic Strength as per EN 206-1:2000 at 32.37MPa

At Quarter Point Left

Compressive
Strength Standard
Count/Tests Rebound (MPa) Mean x-mean (x-mean)2 Deviation
21 57 57 -4.600 21.160
22 52 52 -9.600 92.160
23 65 65 61.6 3.400 11.560 6.913
24 65 65 3.400 11.560
25 69 69 7.400 54.760

Characteristic Strength as per EN 206-1:2000 at 50.26MPa

MSc Thesis Page 46

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

APPENDIX B

Arch bridge Design Procedure

Hfill
External Arc
Centroidal Z
rise Axis
r Internal
Arc
ev
L

Figure Dimensions of Arch

L-Span of arch
Rise-rise of arch
Hfill-height of fill above the crown
Z- is the total height to top of the fill
r-is radius of the arch
f’c-compressive strength of concrete
E-modulus of elasticity of arch material
c -density of concrete
γbf-density of fill material
γSM-density of stone masonry
d-is arch thickness

MSc Thesis Page 47

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

Flow chart for an arch bridge design

Start

Establish Design Criteria and Design

Code (ERA Bridge Design manual

Input Data of
Material
f’c, c,E, γbf, γSM,

Input Dimensions
L,r,ev,Hfill,d,rise
d (1/24 - 1/10) L

Compute the Deadload, Surcharge load and

live Load and apply load combinations

Compute Concrete
Compressive stress

NO
Check stress
edge < all

Yes
Calculate forces in the Superstructure

Finish

MSc Thesis Page 48

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

1. Choose span and rise.

2. Select materials to be used.
3. Determine trial section using a selection of empirical equations.
4. Ignoring horizontal soil pressures, calculate the required arch barrel thickness
using a simple ‘block’ mechanism for the ultimate load condition. This can be
assumed to comprise of appropriately factored loading.
5. Check the compressive stress based on 0.1 (arch thickness) or 100 mm
whichever is the greater. Compressive stress ≤ uf
where u is a coefficient of 0.35 for concrete grades 15 and 20, 0.4 for concrete
grades 25 and above, and 0.44 for masonry; f is the characteristic cube strength
of concrete, fcu, or the compressive strength of masonry fK as appropriate
(allowance for M has been made).
6. Check that the radial shear at the crown is less than 0.4 (horizontal reactions).
7. Check abutment stability and stress levels.
8. Check foundation stability and stress levels.

MSc Thesis Page 49

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

APPENDIX C

Load subdivisions (Legal Truck Type 3) for Quarter Point Loading

Load Step Divisions Total Axle

load (kN),

1 0.03 256.80
2 0.06 513.61
3 0.10 770.42
4 0.13 1027.22
5 0.16 1284.03
6 0.20 1540.84
7 0.23 1797.64
8 0.26 2054.45
9 0.30 2311.26
10 0.33 2568.06
11 0.36 2824.87
12 0.40 3081.68
13 0.43 3338.48
14 0.46 3595.29
15 0.50 3852.1
16 0.53 4108.90
17 0.56 4365.71
18 0.60 4622.52
19 0.63 4879.32
20 0.66 5136.13
21 0.70 5392.94
22 0.73 5649.74
23 0.76 5906.55
24 0.80 6163.36
25 0.83 6420.16
26 0.86 6676.97
27 0.90 6933.78
28 0.93 7190.58
29 0.96 7447.39
30 1.00 7704.2

MSc Thesis Page 50

 Assessment of Load Carrying Capacity of Arch Bridge

APPENDIX D

Load subdivisions (Legal Truck Type 3) for Crown Point Loading

Total Axle
Load Step Divisions load (kN),
1 0.03 513.61
2 0.06 1027.22
3 0.10 1540.84
4 0.13 2054.45
5 0.16 2568.06
6 0.20 3081.68
7 0.23 3595.29
8 0.26 4108.90
9 0.30 4622.52
10 0.33 5136.13
11 0.36 5649.74
12 0.40 6163.36
13 0.43 6676.97
14 0.46 7190.58
15 0.50 7704.2
16 0.53 8217.81
17 0.56 8731.42
18 0.60 9245.04
19 0.63 9758.65
20 0.66 10272.27
21 0.70 10785.88
22 0.73 11299.49
23 0.76 11813.11
24 0.80 12326.72
25 0.83 12840.33
26 0.86 13353.95
27 0.90 13867.56
28 0.93 14381.17
29 0.96 14894.79
30 1.00 15408.40

MSc Thesis Page 51