Estimation of the strength capacity of existing concrete bridges in

Romania
I. R. Răcănel & V. D. Urdăreanu
Technical University of Civil Engineering of Bucharest

ABSTRACT: Gradual changes of weight and geometry of vehicles combined with natural damaging process
caused by weather and traffic sometimes leads to old existing bridges having to be strengthened and retrofitted.
The optimal solution to follow depends on the resistance capacity reserves of each structure, related with the
existing traffic level at the moment of retrofitting works and for an estimated future traffic. Almost all existing
road bridges in Romania were designed according to national provisions/standards, using the old loading
classes I and E respectively. Starting with 2010, following the European Community’s decision, the projects
should be designed according to the Eurocodes and the existing bridges, after the strengthening/retrofitting
processes must comply with the new European load models, even though these structures do not present
obvious damages which are claiming such kind of works. The process of checking existing bridges for the
action of load models described in Eurocodes is a complicated task, involves hard work and consumes a lot of
time. However, for the solutions consisting in the use for the bridge superstructure of precast concrete girders,
the process for the evaluation of the bearing capacity reserves can be significantly simplified using a
probabilistic approach. The approach presented in this paper is based on the effects, in terms of bending
moments and vertical displacements, produced by several types of vehicles on the bridge superstructure. For
presenting the use of this proposed methodology, typical bridge superstructure with precast concrete girders of
different lengths were analyzed. These bridges are frequently used on the road network in Romania and they
were designed using the loading models existing in the national standards at that time. The proposed
methodology allows to establish the “vulnerability” of existing bridges on the action of load models presented
in the Eurocodes in order to establish the most efficient retrofitting solutions.
1 INTRODUCTION 1.2 Romanian road network
1.1 Strength capacity There are many bridges on the road network of
Romania designed using the old national standards
The strength capacity of a bridge during service is that were available at the time of construction.
determined in the design phase by adopting an Among these, many are still performing well under
efficient and functional solution which depends, service, only requiring regular maintenance works,
among others, on using durable, high performance but there is also a large number of bridges showing
materials and correct estimation of the loads and significant degradation to different levels due to lack
behavior of the structure. Designing a structure is of maintenance or inappropriate strength capacity.
generally based on the available data and the level of In the year 2010, the need to use the European
knowledge at the time but, in the case of bridges, Norms (Eurocodes) became mandatory in both
extra measures are taken in order to accommodate designing and erecting new structures. The new
for the wide variety of actions (especially traffic) requirements in durability and loads claim reviewing
foreseen in the future for the entire estimated the existing structures, both the ones with signs of
lifespan. degradation and the ones performing well, in order to
During the service life of a structure, design check whether or not they satisfy the new demands
norms can change several times to such a degree that and keep an acceptable level of safety.
it may be necessary to recheck the existing structure
in accordance with the new provisions in order to
make sure the safety levels under service are still at 1.3 Assessing the safety under service
an acceptable level.
A convenient method for assessing the level of safety
under service for an existing bridge within the
European context, can be estimating strength protected with precast kerbs and pedestrian
capacity reserve using a probabilistic approach. guardrails.
Comparing the old norms with the Eurocodes, it can
be considered that there are only small changes in the
case of permanent loads considered in the design
phase.
The most significant changes in the internal stress
levels are given by the new variable actions. In the
case of concrete bridges with the superstructure
made up of precast, prestressed concrete girders,
staged construction designs were made considering
the different phases of erection with permanent loads
and variable traffic loads.
The methodology proposed in this paper for Figure 1 – Cross section of existing bridge for the case study
estimating the vulnerability of existing concrete
bridges implies establishing a law of distribution for The retrofitting solution chosen for the case study
the maximum stress levels and determining the is removing all the carriageway’s and footway
strength capacity reserves by comparison with the elements (asphalt, slope concrete, kerbs, footways,
design stress levels. pedestrian guardrails, etc.), adding a concrete slab of
In order to make a realistic study, it would have C35/45, widening the superstructure so that H4b
been necessary to have information regarding the barriers can be added to the footways and rebuilding
types of road vehicles frequently transiting these all the carriageway and footway elements.
bridges. The information should have contained
details about the number, distribution and weight of
the axles of each type of vehicle. Sadly however, this
type of data does not exist at an administrative level,
and collecting it requires significant costs and
personnel mobilization. Under these conditions, in
order to finish the study, several load models
considered to be found more often on Romanian
roads were selected from both the old and new
design norms, as well as a number of convoys
previously used for testing bridge structures under
service loads. Figure 2 – Cross section of retrofitted bridge for the case study
Maximum stress levels for the service limit state
were determined by using finite element models and Several analyses were made considering the
linear static analyses considering phases of existing bridge and the retrofitted bridge with a
construction and traffic loads of the old bridges and variable minimum thickness of the new deck of
the ones required for retrofitting them. These were 10cm, 15cm and 25cm.
then associated to a statistic distribution law. Based
on probability density functions and cumulative
distribution functions, the probability of exceedance 2.2 Approach method
was determined for each case (old and retrofitted). The idea of this study was inspired by the
vulnerability analyses of the structures at the seismic
action Vamvatsikos (2002), Annan (2009). The first
2 CASE STUDY phase of the proposed method in the paper is based
2.1 Description of the structure on a distribution of probability of the set of values for
normal stresses or vertical displacements calculated
In order to illustrate the proposed method, a typical in the lateral beam in the middle of the span,
30.00m long bridge superstructure widely used in considering loads from the Serviceability Limit State
Romania in the 1980’s was chosen. The (SLS).
superstructure is made up of 4 precast prestressed The second consists in determining the function of
concrete girders placed at 2.83m apart, an 18cm slab density probability and the one for cumulative
and 3 crossbeams (at each bearing and in the middle distribution. Using these two functions, it is possible
of the span) linking them. The girders were made of to determine the value of reliability in terms of
B500 concrete (equivalent C32/40) and the slab of probability of exceedance of the of the maximum
B400 concrete (equivalent C25/30). It supports a admissible stress or displacement at the middle of the
7.80m carriageway and 2 footways of 1.00m each, span.
 The link between all these three functions can be After determining the internal forces, stresses and
expressed by the following relationships, Lungu displacements in the mid span of the lateral girder
(1982): due to permanent loads, a number of 51 static
b
moving load analyses were performed considering
P a  X  b    f x  x  (1) different load models to simulate traffic conditions
a during bridge service life.
x The permanent loads taken into consideration are:
F  x   f  t  dt (2)
X

X the dead load of the initial structure’s concrete
R X  x   1  FX  x  (3) elements (beams, crossbeams and slab), the dead load
of the over slab of the retrofitted structures, the
where P=distribution of probability, a,b=interval of weight of the carriageway’s supporting elements
values, fX=probability density function, (asphalt layers, kerbs, H4b barriers) and the footways
FX=cumulative distribution function, RX=reliability (concrete fillings, pedestrian guardrails, etc.). As for
function the traffic loads, several design convoys from
2.3 Finite element model different regions of the world and real truck loads
have been taken into account as follows: the design
Three finite element models were built up (one for convoys used in the initial design used in Romania at
each concrete slab thickness) using beam elements the time, according to STAS 3221/86 for classes I, II
for the precast concrete girders and crossbeams and and E, the load models presented in Eurocode SR
shell elements for the slab. One of these models in EN 1991-2/2004, a few convoys used in the
shown in figure 3 bellow. American AASHTO and 4 real convoys used in the
testing of the retrofitting solution used for the
Giurgiu-Ruse Bridge over the Danube. The vehicles
used to simulate the response were grouped and
loaded according with the provisions of their specific
norms at the time, in order to get the most
unfavorable effects in terms of bending moment in
the middle of the span for the lateral beam as well as
maximum vertical displacement of the same element.
Several arrangements of the convoys are provided in
the following figures:
a) Discrete view of the finite element model

b) Extruded view from the top Figure 4 – Examples of traffic load models

In order to obtain a sufficient number of values

required for determining a correct variation for the
distribution of probability, 51 combinations were
made using the vehicles presented above. With the
same configurations for the traffic loads, 51 static
analyses were made for each of the 4 models, all of
them having included the staged construction phases
necessary for erection.
A comparison between the bending moments was
c) Extruded view from the bottom considered irrelevant, as the beams have different
Figure 3 – Finite element model sections depending on the construction stage, and
thus, a comparison of the normal stress at the bottom
fiber was made. The reference for this was
considered the one corresponding to load class E and
convoy V80 according to the Romanian standard, as
this was the norm initially used to design the bridge.
As such, all stress values are compared to this, the
base line being set at 22.62 MPa as 0, positive values
meaning more tension in the fiber by that specific
amount, and negative meaning more compression.
The maximum acceptable limit is only in tension, and
was calculated at 3.2 MPa (maximum acceptable
tensile stress of the old concrete).
Regarding the values for displacement, only the
mobile loads were considered as they have the more
relevant impact. Just as before, all values are
compared to the one corresponding to the V80
convoy load case, but in this case, the base line was
set at 0. The maximum acceptable limit was the one
prescribed by PD 165-2000, as no more then L/800 =
36.8mm.

3 PRELIMINARY RESULTS

After running all the analyses presented above, Figure 5 – Relative frequency histograms
extracting the bending moments in the middle of the
span for the marginal beam and overlaying them
according with the provisions of their norms, a set of
51 variables was obtained for each model. By
considering a sufficient number of intervals and
choosing the correct size for them, histograms of the
relative frequencies and relative cumulative
frequencies were determined. Based on these, the
distribution of probability for the 51 values was
calculated. A similar approach was done for the 51
displacements values calculated in the middle. The
relative frequency and relative cumulative frequency
histograms are presented in the following figures:
Figure 6 – Cumulative frequency histograms Figure 7 – Frequency of normal stress in the bottom fiber over
intervals

By analyzing the histograms above, it can be

considered that the law of distribution of probability The maximum acceptable tension in the concrete
is similar to the lognormal distribution for both the for class C32/40 is 3.2MPa, according to Romanian
bending moments and displacements results. In a national appendix. Most of the values for the stress
lognormal distribution, the density of probability are situated between -3 and 2 MPa, so the structure
function, respectively the cumulative distribution checks out for most load models, but there is a
function are defined as follows: significant percent of values above this limit.
  ln x    2
The maximum displacements calculated in the
1 middle of the span for the marginal girder were only
f X  x  e 2 2 (4)
considered from the actions given by the traffic loads.
x  2  
The extreme values, as well as a partition of the
 ln x   
FX  x     (5) values obtained over intervals can be found in table 2
   bellow.
Where x is the point in which the function is
Table 2. Extreme displacement values
calculated, μ represents the average of the ln x
Displacement Without 10cm 15cm 25cm
values, σ represented the standard deviation of the ln [mm] retrofit slab slab slab
x values and  is the cumulative distribution Minimum 3.00 2.27 2.00 1.66
function for the normal standard distribution which is Maximum 34.18 25.78 22.56 18.61
determined by the following relation: *positive values indicate lowering of the girder
1
 x2
e 2
(6)

2 

The maximum stress levels according to the

characteristic group of the service limit state in the
bottom fiber of the marginal girder were calculated in
the middle of the span for each, accounting for
staged construction and dynamic effects of the
convoys. The extreme values, as well as a partition of
the values obtained over intervals can be found in
table 1.
Figure 8 - Frequency of displacement over intervals
Table 1. Extreme stress values in the bottom fiber
Normal stress Without 10cm 15cm 25cm
[MPa] retrofit slab slab slab
Minimum -3.07 -5.75 -4.78 -2.78
Maximum 12.33 6.52 6.42 6.47 4 CONCLUSIONS
*compression is considered negative, and tension positive
The purpose of study presented in this paper was
to analyze the vulnerability of existing road bridges in
Romania following the action of the actual
vehicles/convoys, which are different with respect to
those used for the initial design. The study presents
for comparison the safety levels of the initial
nonretrofitted structure, but also of the retrofitted
structure using different values for the thickness of
the concrete slab above the prestressed beams. The
vulnerability of the analyzed structures was described
through the values of the reliability, by considering as
response values the values of the stresses in the
bottom extreme fibers of the marginal precast beam
and the vertical displacements in the middle of the
span. The limit values were chosen those obtained in
the design stage using the vehicles A30 and V80 both
described in the Romanian norms used at that time.
Following the performed analyses on considered
bridge it can be concluded that the values of the
stresses in the bottom extreme fibers of the marginal
precast beam based on the bending moments in the
middle of the span and the values of the vertical Figure 10 – Cumulative distribution function and reliability
displacements in the same section follow a for normal stress in the bottom fiber
distribution function close to the lognormal one.
Based on the obtained results one can see that in In terms of vertical displacements, the values of
terms of stresses, presented in table 3, the structure is reliability are extremely small for the retrofitted
vulnerable if it is not strengthened and shows an bridge, in the range 0.39-1.68%, in this case the
acceptable level of safety after the retrofitting solution with a 25cm slab showing a better behavior.
process. The values of the reliability are in the range This fact is normal assuming a higher value of the
4.29-8.37% (Fig.10) for the retrofitted structure and bending stiffness of the bridge superstructure. Even
the most efficient solution appear to be the one with the nonretrofitted bridge shows a satisfactory
10cm thick concrete slab above the precast beams. behavior in terms of displacements.
This result can be explained by the fact that this
thickness ensure a balance between the permanent
and live loads acting on the structure. By overloading
the bridge, during the retrofitting process, by a
thicker slab, will decrease the solution efficiency with
respect to the live load actions.

Figure 11 – Probability density function displacement

Table 4. Displacement comparison of retrofitting solutions

Without 10cm 15cm 25cm
retrofit slab slab slab
Figure 9 – Probability density function for normal stress in the Probability of
bottom fiber nonexceedence 92.23% 98.32% 99.05% 99.61%
Reliability 7.77% 1.68% 0.95% 0.39%
Table 3. Stress comparison of retrofitting solutions *positive values indicate lowering of the girder
Without 10cm 15cm 25cm
retrofit slab slab slab
Probability of
nonexceedence 35.73% 95.71% 95.01% 91.63%
Reliability 64.27% 4.29% 4.99% 8.37%
*compression is considered negative, and tension positive
Figure 12 – Cumulative distribution function and reliability
for displacement

For a more realistic study the traffic measurements

are necessary and on this base, the values of the
reliability for the existing bridges can be established.
Following such analyses the necessity of the use of
an intervention plan for bringing the bridges at the
safety level from the design stage can be established.

REFERENCES

CEN. (2005) EN 1990:2002

Annan, C.D., Youssef, M.A., El Naggar, M.H. (2009) Seismic
Vulnerability Assessment of Modular Steel Bridges,
Journal of Earthquake Engineering 13:8, Taylor&Francis,
pag.1065-1088
Aviram, A., Mackie, K.R., Stojadinović, B. (2008) Guidelines
for Nonlinear Analysis of Bridges Structures in California,
Peer Report 2008/03, Pacific Earthquake Engineering
Research Center, University of California, Berkeley
CEN. (2005) EN 1990: 2002/A1 Basis of structural Design
CEN (2003) EN 1991-2 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part
2 : Traffic loads on bridges
Lungu, D., Ghiocel, D. (1982) Metode probabilistice în
calculul construcţiilor, Editura Tehnică (Probabilistic
methods in the analysis of structures)
Vamvatsikos, D., Cornell, C.A. (2002) Incremental Dynamic
Analysis, Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics 31 (3), John Wiley&Sons Ltd., pag.491-514