{"title":"Shear capacity of inverted-U reinforced concrete bridge beams","authors":"Mahes P. Rajakaruna, V. Vimonsatit, K. Wong","doi":"10.1080/13287982.2022.2060546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Existing reinforced concrete inverted-U beam bridges in Western Australia built using standard beams designed by Public Works Department between 1957 and 1969 were found to have reinforcement anchorage detail at supports not adequate when assessed using recent design standards. Tests were carried out on six full-size bridge beams recovered from a bridge scheduled for replacement to determine whether the deficient detailing adversely affects the shear capacities of these beams. These beams were the longest of the series designed in 1957. In addition, the mean shear strengths of the five bridge beams to AS 5100.5–2004 and to the most recent design standard AS 5100.5–2017 were determined and these were compared with their corresponding test values. It was found from testing that the detail does not affect the shear strength much. The predicted mean shear capacities using AS 5100.5–2017 were found to be more conservative than the corresponding values using AS 5100.5–2004. This suggests the likelihood of low load ratings for shear using the latest design standard (based on the Modified Compression Field Theory) for existing reinforced concrete bridges designed to previous standards.","PeriodicalId":45617,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Structural Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Structural Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13287982.2022.2060546","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT Existing reinforced concrete inverted-U beam bridges in Western Australia built using standard beams designed by Public Works Department between 1957 and 1969 were found to have reinforcement anchorage detail at supports not adequate when assessed using recent design standards. Tests were carried out on six full-size bridge beams recovered from a bridge scheduled for replacement to determine whether the deficient detailing adversely affects the shear capacities of these beams. These beams were the longest of the series designed in 1957. In addition, the mean shear strengths of the five bridge beams to AS 5100.5–2004 and to the most recent design standard AS 5100.5–2017 were determined and these were compared with their corresponding test values. It was found from testing that the detail does not affect the shear strength much. The predicted mean shear capacities using AS 5100.5–2017 were found to be more conservative than the corresponding values using AS 5100.5–2004. This suggests the likelihood of low load ratings for shear using the latest design standard (based on the Modified Compression Field Theory) for existing reinforced concrete bridges designed to previous standards.
期刊介绍:
The Australian Journal of Structural Engineering (AJSE) is published under the auspices of the Structural College Board of Engineers Australia. It fulfils part of the Board''s mission for Continuing Professional Development. The journal also offers a means for exchange and interaction of scientific and professional issues and technical developments. The journal is open to members and non-members of Engineers Australia. Original papers on research and development (Technical Papers) and professional matters and achievements (Professional Papers) in all areas relevant to the science, art and practice of structural engineering are considered for possible publication. All papers and technical notes are peer-reviewed. The fundamental criterion for acceptance for publication is the intellectual and professional value of the contribution. Occasionally, papers previously published in essentially the same form elsewhere may be considered for publication. In this case acknowledgement to prior publication must be included in a footnote on page one of the manuscript. These papers are peer-reviewed as new submissions. The length of acceptable contributions typically should not exceed 4,000 to 5,000 word equivalents. Longer manuscripts may be considered at the discretion of the Editor. Technical Notes typically should not exceed about 1,000 word equivalents. Discussions on a Paper or Note published in the AJSE are welcomed. Discussions must address significant matters related to the content of a Paper or Technical Note and may include supplementary and critical comments and questions regarding content.